P   CALIFORNIA 


LIBRARY   OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF    CALIFORNIA 


CALIFORNIA          LIBRARY   OF   THE   UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


M^j       


s 


F   CALIFORNIA 


LIBRARY    OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA         LIBRARY    OF   THE   UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIF! 


9  ±  g  ^^ 


UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA          LIBRARY    OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF    CALIF 

<5\u-/7t> 

i 


9S£ 


^40 

:   IKIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA          LIBRARY   OF  THE   UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIF 


NINE  LETTERS 

&  ON  THE 


SUBJECT 

OF 

AARON    BURR'S 
POLITICAL  DEFECTION, 

WITH  AN" 

APPENDIX. 


BY  TAMES  CHEETHAM* 


orlt  t 


PRINTED  BY  DENNISTON  &  CHEETHAM,   NO,  149, 
STREET. 


'DiftriR  of  New-Fork,  fs. 

-BE  IT  REMEMBEREDj  that  on  the  fourteenth 

(L.  s.)  day  of  February,  in  the  twenty-fevefith  year  of 

the  Ind«pendence  of  the  United  States  of  America, 

James  Cheetham,  of  the  faid  Diftrift,  hath   depofited   in 

this  office  the  title  of  a  book,  the  right  whereof  he -claims 

as  author,  in  the  words  following,  to  wit, 

"  Nine  Letters  on  the  Subjeft  of  Aaron  Burr's 
Political  Defection,  iitith  an  Appendix . — By  James 
Cheetham." 

IN  CONFORMITY  "to  the  aft  of  the  Congrefs  of  ihe  United 
States,  entitled  tc  Ail  a£l  for  the  encouragement  of  Learn 
ing,  by  fecuring  the  Copies  of  Maps,  Charts  and  Books  to 
the  Authors  and  Proprietors  of  fuch  Copies,  during  the 
times  therein  mentioned." 

EDWARD  DUNSCOMB, 
JClerk  of  the  Diftrict  of  -New-York, 


CS 


Letter  from  Gov.  Bloomfield  to  Col.  Burr. 

TRENTON,  Sept.  17,  1802. 
DEAR  SIR, 

J-T  cannot  have  efcaped  your  knowledge,  that  two 
pamphlets,  entitled,  "  The  Nairative"  and  «  The  View? 
publimed  in  your  city,  have  engaged  much  of  the  public 
attention. 

What  regards  the  fuppreffion  of  Wood's  "  Hiftory  of 
tie  Adminijl  ration  of  John  Adams?  has  become  of  no  mo 
ment  fmce  the  book  itfelf  has  been  publimed  •,  for  it  feemj 
to  be  univerfally  agreed  that  the  book,  fo  far  as  any  effecl: 
could  be  produced  by  it,  was  calculated  to  do  more  inju 
ry  than  benefit  to  the  republican  caufe.  But  the  bold  al 
legations  which  purport  that  you  combined  with  the  fede 
ral  party  to  defeat  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  occafion 
fome  folicitude  among  thofe  to  whom  you  are  unknown. 

Thofe,  indeed,  who  have  witnefled  your  various  and 
uniform  exertions  in  the  caufe  of  liberty,  and  the  firmnefs 
and  independence  of  your  conduct  on  every  occafion,  are 
not  to  be  fhaken  in  their  confidence  or  efteem  by  anony 
mous  calumnies  j*  but  they  can  only  exprefs  their  own 

*  Governor  Bloomfield,  certainly  -without  due  reflection, 
pronounces  the  facts  contained  in  the  "  Narrative"  and  the 

44  View,"  calumnies,  fince,  we  prefume,  thofe  works  are 
anonymous.  This,  although  a  freedom  frequently  taken 
"with  anonymous  writings,  is  incompatible  with  that  dignity  of 
deportment  and  cultivation  of  mind  which  are  requifne  cha- 

racleriflics  of  a  Chief  Magiftrates.     The  Editors  of  the  AME- 


M571815 


E  4  g 

I 

opinions,  and  repeat  the  declarations  which  they  are  in 
formed  you  have  made.  This  leaves  room  for  our  com 
mon  enemies  to  cavil.  If  fome  one  were  authorifed  from 
you  to  make  thefe  declarations,  it  would,  I  think,  remove 
the  apprehenfions  which  are  entertained  by  fome  honed 
men,  warm  in  the  caufe  of  freedom,  jealous  of  their 
rights,  and  watchful  of  thofe  who  have  the  honour  to  be 
their  fervants. 


JRICAN  CITIZEN,  the  writers  of  thefe  letters,  flatter  themfelves 
they  have  evinced,   through,  every  ilage  of  this  intcvelling  dif- 
cuffion,   that   the    principal     fadls   contained     in    thofe    two 
pamphlets  are    true.     Thofe  fails  have  been  affailed    by  four 
perfons,     firfl   by     Mr.  Abraham   Bifhop  of     Connecticut. 
In  page  44   of  the   •'  View"     it  is    Hated,   that    to    further 
his    projects    in    Pennfylvania,    Mr.   Burr  fent    Mr.   \  ifhop 
to  the  Seat   of  Government   of  that  State  during  the  feffion 
of  the  Legiflature.      Mr.  Bifhop   has  been   pleafed   to   deny 
this  ilatementin  two  letters  which  were  publiihed  in  the  Ame 
rican   Citizen,    But  in    the    difcuffion  it  appeared,   firft,  that 
Mr.  Bifhop  was  at  Lancafter  while  the  Legiflature  was  in  fef 
fion  ;    fecond,  that  Mr.  Burr  procured  for   him  letters  of  re 
commendation  ;  and  third,  that  he  manifefted  great  intereft  in 
the  journey  of  Mr.   Bifhop.     In  the  controverfy  with    the 
"writers  of  thefe  letters  Mr.  Bifhop   yielded  every   point  but 
one ;  he  infilled  that    he  was  not  fent  to  Lancafter    by  Mr. 
Burr,  but  acknowledged  that  he  was  there.     It  was  impoffible 
to  prove  that  he  \va.$  font  in  the  ftrict  fenfe  of  the  word,  and 
yet  it  was  fhewn  that  Mr.  Bifliop  vifitcd  Mr.  Burr  frequently 
before  his  departure,  that  Mr.  Burr  fent  for  Ezekiel  Robins  to 
his  own  houfe  to  write  ®r  fign  letters  of  recommendation  for 
Mr.  Bifhop,    arid  from  the  train  of  Mr.   Burr's  machinations, 
which  have  been    developed  in  the  View  and  in  thefe  letters, 
it  is  far  from  being  doubtful  that,  in  whatever  light  Mr.  Bi 
fhop  looked  upon  himfelf,  Mr.  Burr  viewed  him  as  7m  agent, 
Second,  in  page  48  of  the  "View"   the    intrigues  of  Mr. 
Burr  in  South  Carolina  are  noticed,  and  it  is  ftatedthat  he  dif- 
patclied  zn  agent  to  Columbia  alfo,  the  feat  of  government  of 
that  place,  during  the  feflion  of  the  Legiflature,   to    promote 
thofe   intrigues.     See' the  "View."     It  is  added  that   Mr, 


f    5    3 

Our  intimacy  in  our  youth  and  in  the  army,  is  general^ 
ly  known  in  this  (late.     My  addrefs  to  the  people  of  Bur~ 

.Green  wrote  to  Mr.  Burr  regularly  from  Columbia  under  co- 
TCV  to  Mr,   John  Swartwout,  the  JVTarlhal  of  this  diftnci. 

Mr.  Green  acknowledges,  firfr,  that  he  was  at  Columbia  as 
ftated  in  the  "  View/'  but  denies  that  he  \n*difp9tcked  thither 
by  Mr.  Burr.  He  confcfies  that  he  was  felicitous  for  an  equality 
of  votes  between  the  uvoPrefidential  candidates  •  (the  only  ob- 
jecl:  ot  his  million  as  Hated  in  the  View)  that  he  \vroie  to  his 
friend  and  the  confidant  of  Mr.  Burr,  Mr.  Sv;artwout,  but 
denies  that  he  wrote  letters  to  Mr.  Burr  directed  lor  him  un. 
tier  cover  to  Mr.Swartwout.  The  objeft  of  the  View  in  Hat 
ing  that  Mr.  Green  wrote  at  all  from  Columbia  under  any 
modification  or  arrangement,  was  merely  to  fhew  thst  lie  trani- 
mitied  information  to  Mr.  Burr  of  theprogrefs  of  his  niiftion. 
Whether,  therefore,  that  information  was  directed  to  JV'Ir.  Burr 
or  not  under  cover  to  Mr,  Swartwout,  or  not  directed  to  him 
at  all,  is  immaterial  to  the  mam  point,  provided  Mr.  Burr  re 
ceived  that  information  through  a  confidential  channel.  And 
that  he  did,  is  not  nor  cannot  be  denied.  Mr.  Swartwout  was 
the  medium  between  Mr.  Green  and  Mr.  Burr,  and  thus  Mr. 
Burr  obtained  the  requifite  information  from  Mr.  Green.—. 
Mr.  Swartwout  regularly  conveyed  Mr. Green's  letters  to  Mr. 
Burr. 

Third.  Mr.  Swartwout  communicated  for  publication  in  the 
AMERICAN  CITIZEN  an  affidavit  which  was  duly  noticed  by 
the  Editors.  In  this  he  dfe»z>*that  Mr.  Green  wrote  letters  to 
Mr.  Burr  wrapt  in  covers  directed  to  himfelf.  But  as  he  takes 
care  not  to  touch  the  chief  point,  as  he  does  not  fay  that  he 
did  not  receive  letters  from  Mr.  Green  and  carry  them  ilily  and 
carefully  to  r.  Burr,  the  affidavit  is  of  no  avail. 

Fourth.  Mr.  Burr's  denial  of  the  ncgociation  with  the  fede 
ral  party.  It  is  unnecefiary  to  iay  any  thing  on  this  difavowal 
here.  The  following  letters  will  abundantly  fhew  that  he  has 
endeavoured  to  let  ray  his  party,  and  that  the  declarations  con 
tained  in  his  letter  to  Governor  Bloomneld,  are  not  entitled  t* 
Iclitf. 

If,  then,  after  fo  fevere  a  trial  even  the  fufardinate  fags  con 
tained  in  the  two  pamphlets  are  found  unavailable,  W  Gov. 
Bloojnfielcl  juftified  in  denominating  the  "Narrative"  and  the 
"  View"  anonymous  cafanixics? 


C    6    3 

iington,  in  September,  1800,  wherein  I  flated  your  fer- 
vices  in  the  field  and  in  the  cabinet,  and  recommended 
you  forVice-Prefident,  is  not  forgotten  ;  &  thefe  circum- 
fiances  have  occafioned  more  enquiries  of  me  rcfpe&ing 
the  calumnies  againll  you,  than  would  otherwife  have 
been  made. 

I  have  no  other  apology  to  offer  for  this  intrufion,  than 
to  aflure  you  that  it  proceeds  from  motives  founded  in  pa- 
triotifm,  anil  in  that  cordial  friendfhip  which  has  ever  fub- 
fifted  between  us. 

I  avail  myfelf  of  this  opportunity  to  renew  the  afluranccs 
of  my  refjpe6t  and  efteem  \  and  that  I  am, 

Moil  truly,  your  Friend, 

ROBERT  BLOOMFIELD. 
fks  PIcn.  Aaron  Burr,   Vice-Prefident ") 
cf  the  United  States.  5 

ANSWER. 

NEW-YORK,  Sept.  21,  1802. 
DEAR  SIR, 

You  are  at  liberty  to  declare  from  me,  that  all  thofe 
charges  and  infinuations  which  aver  or  intimate  that  I  ad- 
Tfifed  or  countenanced  the  oppofition  made  to  Mr.  Jeffer- 
fon  pending  the  late  election  and  balloting  for  Prefident ; 
that  I  propofed  or  agreed  to  any  terms  with  the  federal 
party,  or  with  any  individual  of  either  party  ;  that  I  aflent- 
ed  to  be  held  up  in  oppofition  to  him,  or  attempted  to 
4vithdra<w  [with-hold]  from  him  the  vote  or  fupport  of  any 
man,  whether  in  or  out  of  Congrefs  •,  that  ALL  SUCH 
ASSERTIONS  ARE  FALSE  AKJ>  GROUNDLESS. 

I  have  [had]  not  thought  that  calumny,  unfupported  by 
proof;  tr  the  author ity  of  a  namct  could  fo  far  receive  at* 


C    7    ) 

tention  from  the  public  as  to  require  an  anfwer,  or  even  % 
denial :  yet  if  you  fhall  imagine  that  any  declaration  from 
me  can  be  necefiary  to  remove  doubts  from  the  mind  of 
one  honeft  man,  you  may  confider  this  letter  as  fubmitted 
to  your  difcretion,  to  publifh  if  you  fliall  think  proper. 

Accept,  I  pf ay  you,  my  thanks  for  your  friendly  folicU 
tude,  and  assurances  of  the  higheft  refpeft  and  confidera- 
tion  with  which  I  am,  Your  obedient  fervant, 

A.  BURR. 

Hit  Excellency  Gw.  Bloomfield. 


To  Aaron  Burr,  Efq. 

LETTER  1. 

*'  Appearances  juflif/  fufpicion :   and    when   the  fafety  of  a 
nation  is  at  ftake,  fufpicion  is  juft  ground  of  enquiry." 

[UNIUS. 

SIR, 

We  make  no  apology  for  addreffing  thefe  letters  to 
you.  Between  Citizen  and  Citizen  none  is  neceflary.  We 
approach  the  office  you  fill  with  that  diffidence  a  proper 
refpecl:  for  public  opinion  infpires.  Nature  fometimes 
makes  fit  and  vifible  diftin&ions  between  an  office  and  the 
incumbent.  Your  cafe  is  an  admonitory  inftance  of  this 
kind.  Confidering  ourfelves,  as  it  refpetts  char  after  ^  not 
inferior  to  you  ;  viewing  your  conduct,  which  forms  the 
fubje£t  of  thefe  letters,  as  that  of  a  mere  citizen,  we^bf- 
fer  no  apology  for  them.  We  fhall  treat  you  with  refpect 
becaufe  of  your  office ;  with  decency  bec^aufe  you  are  a 


man.     Your  anfwer  to  the  letter  of  Governor  Bloomfield, 
has  rendered  thefe  letters  neceffary. 

You  have  at  length  pierced  through  the  fable  cloud  in 
which  you  have  been  fo  long,  and  fo  conveniently  envelop-1 
cd,  and  exhibited  yourfelf  before  your  fellow-citizens  on 
an  important  accufatlon  preferred  againil  you  in  the  "View 
of  your  Political  ConduG."  It  is  not  unknown  to  us 
that  you  have  for  fome  months  been  endeavouring  to  ap 
pear  before  the  public  in  an  attitude  eflentially  different 
from  the  one  in  which  we  now  behold  you.  No  pains, 
no  exertions,  no  importunities  have  been  fpared  to 
enable  you  to  appear  in  your  defence  fupported  by 
teilimony  other  than  your  own.  Your  efforts  were  not 
crowned  with  correfponclent  fuccefs.  In  this,  were  you 
an  innocent  man,  you  would  be  an  objedt  of  commifera- 
tion  ;  your  guilt,  however,  was  the  caufe  of  your  failure. 
Your  refined  arts  failed  in  the  production  of  their  wiflied- 
for  and  wonted  fuccefs.  The  testimony  of  two  refpe£ted 
Clergymen  in  this  city,  which  you  folicited  in  a  manner 
not  honorable  to  yourfelf,  to  contradict  a  statement  in  the 
"  View"  refpecl:ing  your  negociation  with  the  federalists 
pending  the  Prefidential  election,  was  peremptorily  fefuf- 
ed.  You  felt  and  manifested  all  that  mortification  which, 
in  your  fituation,  io  prompt  and  manly  a  repulfe  was  cal 
culated  to  excite.  This  mall  be  explained  in  its  proper 
place.  i 

You  deny  the  capita!  charge  exhibited  againfl  you  in  the 
"  View."  If  we  miftake  not  you  will  regret  this  timerity 
before  we  take  our  leave  of  you.  You  carefully  abftain, 
however,  from  difavowing  the  general  charges  brought 
againil  you  in  the  "  Narrative"  and  the  «  View."  You 
fimply  declare  that  you  did  not  enter  into  tfa 


(     9    ) 

mentioned  with  the  faleralijls^  nor  make  ufe  of  any  arts  to 
"  withdraw"  from  Mr.  Jeff  erf  on  the  vote  or  fupport  of  any 
man.  The  other  charges  contained  in  the  "  View,"  and 
which  are  of  a  highly  important  nature,  you  leave  un 
touched.  Your  denial  of  the  principal  charge  was  to 
have  been  expe&ed.  It  imputes  to  you  fuch  a  depth  of 
wickednefs,  fuch  unheard  of  treachery,  that  few  men 
could  believe  you  would  either  fancliion  it  by  your 
filence  or  confirm  it  by  your  pen.  Your  negative  declara 
tion  can  have  but  little  effecl:.  It  is  not  ufual  for  men  vo 
luntarily  to  acknowledge  offences  which  would  at  once 
itrip  them  of  every  title  to  refpecl,  and  render  them  odi 
ous  to  their  fellow-citizens.  Thofe  who  beft  know  you 
will  not  implicitly  believe  your  denial ;  and  thofe  who 
know  you  lead  will  enquire  before  they  accredit  it. 

We  aflc  for  no  more  than  this  enquiry  ;  we  folicit  only 
a  candid   and  patient  hearing.     We  have  accufed  you  of1- 
offences,  which  ought,  if  you  are  guilty  of  them,  to  banijh  1 
you  forever  from  the   affections  of  ALL  parties,  but  efpecially\ 
the  REPUBLICAN.     That  you  are  guilty  of  thofe  acts  which 
we  have  laid   to  your    charge,    we  {hall,  in  the  courfe  of 
thefe  letters,   notwithflanding  your  denial,  endeavour  to 
prove  by  the  teftimony  of  men  refpe&able  for  their  years, 
their  approved  good  {landing  in  fociety,  and  for  their  ta 
lents.     It,  however,  beft  comports  with  our  views  firft  to 
give    a  general   hiftoric  {ketch  of  your  political  conduct, 
and  then  to  offer  proof  in  contradiction  to  your  denial. — 
We  therefore,  a  fecond  time,  beg  the  reader  to  accompany 
us  with  attention  through   our   remarks      The  fubjecl:  is 
important  j  it  involves  the  deareft  interefts  of  the 


nit  jr.     We  mall  purfue  you  with  diligence  and  care  thro* 
your  various  windings.     We  (hall  note  you  when 

"  Often  on  the  brink  of  fome  difcovery 
"  You  ftood  tottering,  yet  ftill  kept  your  ground 
"  So  well,  that  the  bufieft  fearches  ne'er  could  follow 
*'  Thoie  fubtle  traces  which  puzzled  all  fufpicion." 


LETTER    IL 

tl  The  eminence  of  your  ftation  gave  you  a  commanding  prof- 
"  ped  of  your  duty.  The  road,  which  led  to  honor,  was  open 
"  to  your  view.  You  could  not  lofe  it  by  miftake,  and  you  had 
"  no  temptation  to  depart  from  it  by  detign." 

JUNIUS. 

SIR, 

JUNIUS  had  a  charader  like  yours  in  his  "mind's 
eye"  when  he  penned  the  above  lines.  They  are  defcriptive 
of  your  conduct  and  your  ftation.  The  "road  which  led" 
to  "honor"  was  indeed  before  you;  but  it  fuited  not  the  way 
ward  difpofition  of  your  mind  to  march  with  fidelity  to  it. 
The  firft  function  of  the  Republic  tempted  your  ambition, 
and,  purfuing  thejufuitical  maxim  that  the  end  will  juftify 
the  means,  you  grafped  at  the  prize  before  it  had  been  a- 
warded  to  you  by  your  country.  You  rofe  in  the  political 
world  without  merit ;  the  elevated  object  was  indeed  feen, 
but  the  caufe  of  the  exaltation  was  infcrutable.  Your 
adventitious  fame  ftood  not  on  folid  ground.  It  was  fplen- 
did  only  when  viewed  at  a  diftance  :  it  yielded  to  the 
touch  of  inveftigation.  There  is  no  point  in  your  charac 
ter  on  which  a  reflecting  mind  can  reft  with  fatisfaction*. 


(  II  ) 

Strip  you  of  the  falfe  glare  with  which  you  are  furrouiid^ 
ed,  and  we  pronounce  that,  fince  the  revolutionary  war, 
there  is  not  an  action  of  your  life  that  has  been  eminent, 
ly  ufeful  to  your  country.  Lrke  the  appendages  of  a  kite, 
you  afcended  with  the  well-earned  fame  of  others.  He 
who  will  examine  your  character  will  be  aftoniflied  at  your 
elevation.  What  is  there  in  it  that  entitles  you  to  the  con 
fidence  of  the  people  ?  What  are  your  claims  ?  In  what 
have  you  diftinguimed  yourfelf  as  a  flatefman  ?  As  a  po 
litician  you  have  been  wavering  and  inconftant.  You 
have  veered  with  every  gale  that  promifed  you  a  harbour 
to  gratify  your  boundlefs  ambition.  Fickle  in  difpofition* 
you  have  (hifted  with  every  adverfe  blaft.  Emphatically, 
you  have  been  "  all  things  to  all  men."  The  federalifts 
have  viewed  you  as  an  enemy  in  the  republican  camp.  We 
fhall  (hew  that  they  were  not  miftaken.  They  well  un- 
derftood  your  character.  To  the  REPUBLICANS,  until 
lately,  it  has  been  enveloped  in  myftery.  Sir,  you  never 
diftinguifhed  yourfelf  as  a  WRITER.  Your  inelegant  let 
ter  to  Governor  Bloomfield  abundantly  proves  that  you 
are  ignorant  even  of  the  art  of  compofition.  The  public 
have  no  hold  of  you — you  have  given  them  no  pledge — 
you  appear  intangible.  Yet  with  all  your  art  ta  conceal 
your  defe£ls,  with  all  your  cunning  to  undermine  public 
opinion  and  fet  at  naught  the  very  SUFFRAGE  of  the  COM 
MONWEALTH,  we  have  grappled  you  !  We  hold  you  faft, 
nor  fhall  you  efcape.  We  will  «  drag  you  to  the  altar  of 
public  opinion  j"  and,  when  we  have  done  this  our  duty, 


call  on  our  fellow-citizens,  in  language  too  impreliive  to  be 
refilled,  to  perform  theirs. 

Permit  us  now,  Sir,  to  fketch  your  political  likenefs, 
and  be  patient  while  we  perform  the  irkfome  talk.  Every 
prominent  feature  (hall  be  noticed,  that  the  LEADING  one, 
which  you  renounce,  may  be  recognized  as  your  own. 

You  filled  in  the  revolutionary  army  afubordinate  poft;from 
which  you  retired  long  before  the  clofe  of  the  war.  From 
the  restoration  of  peace  to  the  year  1789,  you  were  fo  lit 
tle  heard  of  in  the  world  that  it  may  be  faid  you  died  a 
political  death.  Nor  was  the  trump  of  the  federal  conftitu- 
tion  fuilicient  to  raife  you  up  from  your  torpid  flate.  To 
the  importance  of  the  time,  you  were  liftlefs ;  to  the 
eloquence  of  our  wife  men,  immovable.  The  chords  of 
your  heart  refufed  to  vibrate  in  unifon  with  the  fliouts  of 
the  mofl  important  and  joyful  period  the  world  ever  be 
held.  This  is  a  trait  in  your  character  difficult  to  deline 
ate.  If  you  were  then  AMBITIOUS,  there  was  room 
enough  to  gratify  it.  If  PATRIOTIC,  your  country  called 
and  freedom  demanded  your  exertions.  But  if  you  were 
neither  ambitious  nor  patriotic,  you  adcd  confidently  in 
folding  your  arms  and  refilling  every  kind  emotion  in  fa 
vour  of  your  country. 

In  1789  you  made  your  firft  appearance  on  our  politi 
cal  theatre.  Here  we  fhould  imagine  you  would  have 
taken  your  political  ground.  Hence  it  is  important  to 
contemplate  the  commencement  of  your  career.  You 
firft  attached  yourfelf  to  ti\z  federal  party,  and  a£ted  with 


(     '3     ) 

them  \vith  zeal  and  energy.  You  arrayed  yourfelf  in  op- 
pofition  to  that  found  patriot  and  eminent  ItatefmanMe- 
lan&on  Smith,  and  thofe  witli  whom  he  had  uniformly 
aded.  You  were  a  coadjutor  of  General  Hamilton,  and 
united  with  him  in  federal  committees  to  oppofe  the  elec 
tion  of  governor  Clinton.  This  was  your  firit  ftand.  But 
from  the  federal  party  you  had  no  hopes  of  gratifying  your 
ambition:  Like  Csefar,  but  without  his  talents,  you  would 
rather  be  the  "  firft  in  a  village  than  the  fecond  in  Rome." 
The  fuperior  luilre  of  Hamilton,  an  orb  of  inferior  magni 
tude,  threw  a  (hade  on  your  character.  You  were  jealous 
of  the  high  eftimation  in  which  he  was  held  by  the  federal- 
ills.  And  no  fooner  was  it  afcertained,  after  an  election 
uncommonly  contefted,  that  the  republicans  were  predom 
inant  in  the  itate,  than  you  abandoned  the  federal  and  at 
tached  yourfelf  to  the  republican  party.  This  tranfition 
was  viewed  at  the  time  by  the  enlightened  men  of  both 
parties,  as  the  eiFecT:  of  jealoufy  on  the  one  hand  and  un 
warrantable  ambition  on  the  other.  You  were  in  hopes 
that  the  republican  party  would  fondly  embrace  you,  and 
gratify  your  ambition  by  conferring  upon  you  an  office. 

You  were  gratified.  In  the  year  1 791,  the  feat  of  Gen 
eral  Schuyler  in  the  federal  fenate  became  vacant.  Gen 
eral  Schuyler  is  the  father-in-law  of  General  Hamilton, 
and  is  known  to  have  aided,  if  he  did  not  firft  recommend, 
the  Englifh  funding  fyftem,  which  General  Hamilton, 
with  fo  little  wifdom  but  much  zeal,  propofed  to  Con- 
grefs  when  fecretary  of  the  treafury.  Your  jealoufy  of 
General  Hamilton  afterwards  ripened  into  implacable  ha 
tred.  You  afpired  to  fill  the  vacant  feat  in  the  fenata, 


(     '4     ) 

xnd  found  means  to  intimate  your  wifhes  to  the  ftate  le- 
giflature,  which  was  then  republican.  General  Schuyler's 
predilection  for  the  funding  fyftem,  rendered  him  deferv- 
cdly  unpopular  with  our  ftate  legiflature,  and  this  diilike 
of  the  father-in-law  naturally  extended  to  the  fon,  who 
•was  of  the  two  the  more  mifchievous  inftrument.  Your 
hatred  of  Hamilton  and  the  saufe  of  it  were  not  unknown 
to  the  Legiflature  ;  you  were  therefore  deemed  a  proper 
perfon  to  oppofe  his  funding  and  other  ruinous  meafures. 
Still  were  your  principles  fufpe&ed  -,  for  although  you  had 
attached  yourfelf  to  the  republican  party,  your  fidelity  to 
the  caufe  was  doubted.  After,  however,  aflurances  had 
been  received  from  yonrfelf  that  you  would  fupport  in  the 
federal  fenate  republican  meafures,  you  were  appointed  to 
fill  the  vacant  feat. 

Here,  Sir,  you  "  rofe  like  a  rocket."  In  1788  you 
were  unknown  in  the  political  world.  In  1789  you  ap 
peared  in  oppofition  to  the  republican  party  ;  and  in  1791 
you  found  yourfelf  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States, 
and  owed  your  elevation  to  a  republican  Legiflatuie.  You 
were  the  mere  child  of  Fortune.  You  had  done  nothing 
to  merit  the  diftinguifhed  honor.  You  had  neither  mani- 
fefted  talents  nor  confiflency.  You  had  given  no  pledge 
Superior  to  a  promife,  and  that  promife  was  "  as  a  broken 
reed." 


LETTER    III. 

"  The  more  he  protefted,  the  more  his  countrymen  thought 
4<  he  ditfembled,  accounting  his  feeming  integrity  to  be  but  36 
*'  cunning  face  of  faifchood. 

SIDNEY. 

WE  never  witnefied  fo  much  anxiety  in  the  pub 
lic  mind  as  is  now  manifeft  refpecling  the  controverfy 
between  the  friends  of  the  adminiftration  and  the  Vice- 
Prefident.  There  are  but  few  perfons  even  in  this  city/, 
who  think  Mr.  Burr  innocent  of  the  charges  exhibited 
agairtft  him  in  the  "  View  of  his  Political  Conduft." — 
All,  however,  are  folkitous  to  be  furnifhed  with  proof  of 
hi&£itt//.  In  DUE  TIME  as  full  and  complete  proof  SHALL, 
be  laid  before  the  public  as  the  cafe  will  admit  of.  Pa?- 
tience  is  recommended  to  our  friends,  and  we  promiie 
them  it  {hall  not  be  abiifed.  Our  mode  of  handling  tne 
fubjecl:  has  been  adopted  on  mature  reflection,  and  in  the 
fequel  will  be  found  fatisfa&ory.  We  wifh  to  lay  before 
our  country  fubfcribers  a  faithful  flcetch  of  Mr.  Burr's  po 
litical  character.  Of  this,  little  has  been  faid  in  our  pa 
per,  and  of  near  feven  hundred  fubfcribers  for  the  Watch 
Tower,  it  is  believed  not  more  than  fifty  have  read  die 
«  View."  It  is  proper  that  fo  large  and  refpe&able  a  body 
of  republicans  mould  be  made  acquainted  with  the  character 
of  theVice-Prefident  previous  to  laying  proof  of  his  offences 
before  them.  On  all  hands  the  fubject  is  allowed  to  be  of 
immenfe  interefts  to  the  country,  and  a  knowledge  of  it 
fhould  be  equal  to  its  importance.  Our  Cits  ought  to  re 
member  that  if  they  are  acquainted  with  the  intrigues  of 


c  i6  ) 

Mr.  Burr,  the  union  at  large  is  not ;  that  if  they  are  ripe 
for  proof  of  his  guilt,  our  fellow-citizens  in  the  country 
have  not  had  the  fame  opportunities  to  acquire  the  previ 
ous  requifite  information. 

It  is  our  intention,  and  we  will  not  permit  ourfelves  to  be 
diverted  from  it,  to  unfold  the  prominent  intrigues  of  the 
Vice-Prefident.  When  this  is  done  it  will  then  be  appa 
rent  that  thofc  machinations  with  which  he  is  charged, 
which  he  has  denied,  and  of  which  we  mall  offer  fatJsfac- 
tory  teftimony,  are  confident  with  his  general  character. 
Seeing,  therefore,  as  our  fellow-citizens  no  doubt  do,  the 
importance  of  the  fubje£t,  we  afk  for  nothing  more  than 
permifiion  to  manage  it  in  fuch  a  way  as  to  produce,  in 
our  opinion,  the  greateft  poffible  good.  In  this  ft  age  of 
the  bufinefs  we  do  not  think  it  proper  to  go  farther  than 
to  fay  that,  in  dire  ft  oppofition  to  Mr.  Burr's  denial >  \VE 

WILL     PROVE     THE     NEGOCIA1  ION     AS     STATED     IN    THE 

«  VIEW."  Let  this  be  remembered,  and  for  the  prefent 
fuffice. 

We  refume  the  fubjecl;  of  Mr.  Burr's  chara&er. 

We  ftated,  Sir,  at  the  clofe  of  our  fecond  letter,  that 
you  were  elected  a  federal  lenator  for  this  ft  ate  at  a  pe 
riod  when  you  had  not  performed  a  fmgle  a£t  which  dif- 
tinguiflied  you  either  as  a  man  of  talents,  or  political  pro 
bity.  That  "  in  1788,  you  were  unknown  in  the  political 
world.  In  1789,  you  made  your  firft  appearance  in  oppo- 
fttien  to  the  Republican  party  ;  and  in  1791?  two  years 
only  after  your  firil  entrance  into  political  life,  you  found 


yourfelf  in  the  Senate  of  the  Unked  States,   and  owed 
your  elec?don  to  a  republican  legislature." 

You  felt  no  gratitude  to  the  Republicans  for  this  fignal 
act  of  unmerited  munificence.  Although  raifed  to  fo  ele 
vated  an  office  by  a  magnanimous  party,  the  fupremc  ob 
ject  of  your  adoration  was  yourfelf.  -Every  (lep  of  your 
political  life  -has  been  marked  more  by  cunning  than  by 
nvifdom.  Inftead  of  attaching  yourfelf  with  zeal  and  fr.ice- 
rity  to  that  party  from  whofc  bounteous  hand  you  had  re 
ceived  in  advance  the  diflinguimed  honor  you  enjoyed, 
you  were  wrapped  up  in  felfJbne/S)  and  looked  forward 
only  to  the  accoroplimment  of  unwarrantable  clefigns. — 
But  your  views  •  were  too  boundlefs  for  your  talents,  and 
in  grafping  at  the  whole  you  overlooked  the  means  ne- 
ceffary  to  fecure  a  part.  If  the  ultimate  point  of  your  am 
bition  was  the  Presidency,  your  wavering  deportment  was 
ill  calculated  to  attain  it.  The  Federal  party  could  have 
no  confidence  in  fo  verfatile  a  genius,  and  thofe  of  the  Re 
publican  who  watched  your  motions  could  not  but  fuf- 
pecl  your  views. 

In  1 792,  one  year  after  your  Senatorial  appointment,  the 
election  for  Governor  of  this  ftate  recurred.  Here,  with 
that  art  and  diiTimulation  which  have  accompanied  you 
through  life,  and  which  you  plajed  oiF  fo  admirably  at  the 
late  Prefidential  election,  you  flily  offered  yourfelf  a  candi 
date  to  the  Federal  party.  You  thus  early  afpired  to  the 
feat  of  the  ftate  government.  You  firil  tried  ftratagems,  in 
tbe  invention  of  which  you  are  fo  fruitful,  to  get  yourfelf 

C 


nominated,  by  the  party  to  whom  you  had  attached  yoiif-* 
felf,  in  oppcfition  to  the  Republican  Candidate  agreed  up 
on,  but  finding  the  Republicans  were  not  fo  fond  of  you 
as  you  were  of  yourfelf,  your  friends,  few  in  number  and 
with  your  confent,  very  modeftly  tendered  your  fervices  to 
the  federal  party.  From  them,  alfo,  you  met  with  a  repulfe. 
They  had  no  confidence  in  the  man]  who,  for  an  office, 
attached  himfelf  to  the  Republican  party,  and  who,  in  one 
year  aftei  his  ambitious  defire  was  gratified,  made  overtures 
to  join  the  Federal  party  for  one  of  a  higher  grade.  The 
Federalifts  nominated  Mr.  Jay,  and  then  with  your  ufual 
diffidence,  you  formally  declined  being  confidered  a  can 
didate  !  [See  Greenleaf's  paper,  February  2pth,  1792.3 

Your  character,  Sir,  is  vifible  in  all  your  walks.  Your 
convenient  temper  in  the  year  1792,  comports  with  your 
accommodating  difpofition  at  the  Prefidential  election  of 
1800.  In  1792,  you  manifefted  a  wiliingnefs  to  abandon 
your  party  for  the  office  of  Governor  of  the  State.  In 
1800,  as  we  (hall  prove,  you  negociated  to  SELL  your 
party  to  attain  the  Prefidency  of  the  United  States  !  You 
have  always  been  the  fame  intriguer — the  fame  felfifh 
mortal — the  fame  afpiring  genius.  Stability  is  not  nor 
was  it  ever  an  attribute  of  your  character. 

In  1792,  as  in  1800,  you  worked  with  «  ropes  and  pul- 
lies."  You  continued  behind  the  curtain,  and  was  feen 
to  peep  through  it  only  by  thofe  who  kept  their  eyes  fled- 
faftly  upon  you.  Your  agents  were  then  as  vifible  as  now. 
The  farce  of  your  declining  to  be  confidered  a  candidate, 
when  you  had  found  that  neither  the  Republicans  nor  Fe- 


C     '9     ) 

deralifts  would  take  you  up,  was  acted  at  a  fecrct  confer 
ence  held  with  you  at  Princeton,  New-Jerfey,  by  a  few  of 
your  friends,  and  accordingly  with  great  pomp  and  for 
mality  announced  to  die  public. 

You  were  not  diftieartened  by  your  defeat.  You  ftill 
kept  your  eye  on  the  Governormip  of  the  ftate.  The  re 
jection  by  the  federalists  of  the  proffer  of  your  fervices  in 
1792,  convinced  you  that  you  had  nothing  to  expect  from 
them.  Your  hopes  were  now  centered  in  the  Republican 
party  ;  and  you  were  fenfible  that  unlefs  the  then  Governor 
could  be  perfuaded  to  refign,  and  make  an  early  annunci 
ation  of  his  intention  to  do  fo,  you  had  no  chance  for  fuc- 
cefs.  To  this  point  you  directed  your  attention.  In 
trigues  were  fet  on  foot  but  to  no  purpofe.  Your  agents 
and  yourfelf  were  every  where  bufy.  Mifreprefentations 
were  induftrioufly  circulated.  Three  of  your  friends  in 
this  city  prefumptuoufly  wrote  a  circular  letter  to  various 
influential  republican  characters  in  the  ftate,  reprefenting 
the  neceffity  of  the  Governor's  declining.  The  felfifh  de- 
fign  was,  however,  generally  perceived.  In  every  move 
ment  you  were  yifibie,  and  meafures  were  accordingly 
taken  to  defeat  your  machinations.  The  Governor's  ill 
health  rendered  his  refignation  neceflary  for  his  own  com 
fort,  but  he  very  prudently  took  care  not  to  announce  his 
intention  to  refign  until  a  late  period.  After  his  refigna 
tion  was  proclaimed,  your  friends,  compofed  of  Federalifts 
and  Republicans,  were  as  bufy  as  bees ;  their  buz  was 
heard  throughout  the  city.  A  meeting  of  forty  reprefenta- 
tives  and  other  influential  gentlemen  was  held  to  nominate 
a  candidate  for  the  office  of  Governor.  This  was  the  feat 


of  a£lion  for  your  friends.  They  cut,  however,  but  a  for- 
ry  figure.  Of  the  forty  votes,  you  had  only  fix  !  Judge 
Yates  was  the  Republican  candidate  agreed  upon. 

+  This  gentleman  you  funported  for  the  office  of  Gov- 
"  crnor  in  the  year  1789 — when  you  were  on  the  Federal 
fide — with  great  zeal  and  activity.  It  was  expedl'ed  that 
you  could  do-no  fefs  in  the  year  i  794,  when  you  profeffpct' 
yourfelf  to-  be  a  Republican.  But  no,  you  were  a  difap- 
pointed  man  ;  you  wifhed  to* have  been  nominated  your 
felf  in  the  room  of  Judge  Yates,  and  as  -\ou  could  gain  no 
thing  by  the  cle£Hcn,  you  refolved  to  take  no  active  part 
in  favor  of  your  fuccefsful  rival.  «  If  you  could  do  no 
thing  for  yourfelf,  you  would  do  nothing  for  the  party  to 
whom  you:  were  pfofejjedly  attached."  You  were  neutral  j 
you  retired  fullen  to  your  clofet,  and  viewed  the  conteit 
with  perfect  indifference. 

In  this  flate  of  liftlefsnefs  you  continued  until  the  end  of 
your  Senatorfhip,  March  3d,  1797. 


LETTER    IV. 

SIR, 

THIS  year  (1797)  you  were  a  candidate  for  the  Vice- 
Frefidency.  Your  claims  in  that  office  were  founded  on 
a  general  ignorance  of  your  real  character.  You  had 
done  nothing  to  merit  the  diftincYion.  You  were  hardly 
known  in  the  country.  Your  pretenfions  were  rather  a 
fubjeft  of  ridicule  than  of  ferious  import.  You  were 


fufpefted'  too,  of  having  tampered  with  forne  of  the  fede 
ral  party  in  our  flate  legiflature.  It  is  believed,  on  good 
authority,  that  Mr.  John  Bird  and  Mr.-  Thomas  Morris 
were  in  your  intereft,  and  it  was  contemplated,  and  in 
faft  attempts  were  made,  to  hold  up  a  ticket  of  federal  •< 
eleftcrs,  tv/o  of  whom,  pointed  out  by  your/elf,  it  was  ex 
pected  would,  from  a  mutual  interchange  of  good  offices,' 
and  a  prefumed  congeniality  of  fentiment,  vote  for  you; 
As  an  evidence  of  your  intrigue  on  this  fubjeft,  at  that 
period,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  Journals  of  the  Aifem- 
bly,  which,  to  any  one  acquainted  with  the  perfons  then 
in  the  Legiflature,  will  fufficiently  indicate  it.  You  were, 
however,  as  was  to  have  been  expected,  unfuccefsful.  Of 
the  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight  votes  for  Prcfident  and 
Vice-Prefident,  you  had  only  thirty.  Thofe  who  knew 
you  doubted  your  attachment  to  the  republican  caufe,  and 
thofe  who  knew  you  not  were  not  likely  to  give  you  their 
fupport.  Some  of  the  eleftors  fupported  you  from  a  hope 
that  in  company  with  Mr.  Jefferfon  you  could  do  no  ef- 
fential  injury  to  the  caufe.  Your  fubfequent  conduct  has 
evinced  that  this  was  a  miftaken  notion. 

During  your  fenatorfhip,  you  fignalized  yourfelf  by  one 
aft  only  of  magnanimity  and  firmnefs.  You  oppofed  the 
ratification  of  the  Britifh  treaty.  For  this  folitary  aft  we 
give  you  full  credit.  It  is  the  more  deferring  of  particular 
notice  as  it  (lands  alone. 

In  tKe  fame  year  (1797)  you  were  elefted  a  member  of 
the  Staie  Aflembly  for  this  city.  Here,  Sir,  your  conduct 
was  fuf^ucious.  To  thofe  of  the  party  to  whom  you  at 


(      22       ) 

tached  yourfelf,  and  who  had  conferred  upon  you  all  your 
political  honours,  your  deportment  wasfupercilious ,  to  the 
adverfe  party  pliant  and  ambiguous. — You  were  inatten 
tive  to  your  duty  as  a  Legiflator.  You  were  rarely  found 
in  your  feat  but  when  fomc  bridge  laiu^  or  fome  iuch 
fcheme,  was  before  the  houfe,  and  which  was  principally, 
defigned  to  feather  the  nefls  of  a  few  favorites.  To  thefc 
things  you  were  ever  attentive.  To  whatfoever,  indeed, 
had  a  tendency,  in  your  opinion,  to  benefit  yourfdf\  you 
were  never  indifferent.  Bat  where  any  great  principle 
was  concerned,  whenever  a  fabitary  blow  was  to  be  ilruck 
in  favor  of  the  caufe  of  freedom,  you  were  either  not  to 
be  found  in  your  place,  or  flood  there  tottering  in  your 
ihoes.  There  is  only  one  exception  to  thefe  remarks  ; 
and  that  is  on  the  queftion  of  the  MafTachufetts  amend 
ment  to  the  federal  conftitution,  principally  aimed  at  Mr. 
Gallatin.  On  that  proposition  you  made  an  elaborate  and 
ingenious  fpeech.  You  did  yourfelf  much  credit  -,  but 
you  riflced  nothing.  The  amendment  was  odious  in  the 
fight  of  the  republicans,  and  not  very  popular  with  the 
federalills  in  the  Affembly.  There  was  a  known  majority 
aguinft  it. 

Your  conduct  was  very  different  on  the  Virginia  and 
Kentucky  refolutions.  On  them  you  dilplaycd  no  energy  5 
no  eloquence.  You  appeared  uninterefted  in  the  iilue  of 
the  momentous  qucflion  •,  you  were  indifferent  to  its  fate. 
You  voted  in  favor  of  them  it  is  true,  but  you  fcavcely 
fpoke  in  their  defence.  There  was  a  majority  of  federal- 
ills  in  the  Affembly  againft  them,  and  this,  inflead  of  ex 
citing  you  to  correfpondent  exertions,  fealed  your  lips. 
The  refolutions  were  cenfurcd  fifty  to  forty-thre?. 


This  trimr.nng  conduct  did  not  pafs  without  notice.  It 
was  attributed  to \hi\tprudcnt  policy  which,  while  it  kd 
not  to  an  immediate  rupture  with  your  own  party,  had  a 
tendency  to  conciliate  the  afFc&ious  of  the  oppofite  feet  in 
your  favor.  It  had  the  defired  effect  ;  and  their  fenfe  of 
your  general  conduct  manifefted  iifelf  at  the  Prefidentui 
conteft  in  the  Houfe  of  Reprefentatives.  They  viewed 
you  as  a  feeker  of  power  under  a  falie  exterior  ;  as  being 
fecretly  with  them. 

But  though  you  were  indifferent  to  thefe  great  national 
queftions,  you  were  ever  attentive  to  thofe  which  promifed 
a  gratification  of  your  defircs.  You  devoted,  without  in- 
terruiffion,  fix  months  to  the  act  to  incorporate  the  Man 
hattan  company.  Here,  no  exertion  on  your  part  was 
wanting  •,  you  were  not  indifferent.  From  this  you  not  only 
expected  to  derive  forty  or  fifty  thoufand  dollars,  which 
it  is  faid  you  actually  made  by  the  institution,  but  you  an 
ticipated  a  rich  harvelt  of  popularity  from  both  parties, 
whom  you  took  good  care  to  intereil  in  it.  Thefe  were 
objects  fufficient  to  command  your  ferious  attention,  to 
animate  your  endeavours.  They  did  fo.  The  firit  was 
the  principal  caufe  of  your  exertion,  the  fecond  an  object 
not  unwelcome  to  a  man  of  your  unbounded  ambition. 
The  a£t  to  incorporate  the  Manhattan  company,  your 
celebrated  fcheme  for  the  erection  of  a  new  oilice  to  fu- 
perintend  the  exaction  of  efcheats,  and  a  new  infolvent 
bill — in  all  which  you  were  perfonally  interested — com 
manded  your  pfincipal  attention  while  in  the  State  Legif- 
lature.  To  queftions  of  national  moment,  you  were  in  a 
great  meafure  liftlefs ;  to  your  party,  generally  contume 
lious.  While  you  were  eagerly  purfuing  projects  of  per- 
fonal  aggrandizement,  you  feem  to  have  had  neither  the 
•urifdom,  prudence,  nor  fuavity  necefTary  for  its  attainment. 


To  your  clofet  friends,  you  were  bland  ;  to  the  community 
at  large,  your  deportment  was  forbidding. 

Such  has  been  your  conduct  in  and  out  of  office  from  the 
year  1788  to  the  year  1800  -j  conduct  that  exhibits  nei 
ther  talents,  probity  nor  confiilency.  There  is  nothing  in 
it  to  admire,  nothing  to  applaud,  but  much  to  condemn. 
It  manifefts  all  that  low  cunning  peculiar  to  little  minds. 
It  is  neither  ufeful  nor  magnanimous. 


LETTER     V. 

"  A  great  nan,  in  the  fucccfs  and  even  in  the  magnitude  of 
"  his  crimes,  finds  a  iticuc  from  contempt.'* 

JUNIUS. 

SIR, 

WE  have  followed  your  footfteps  from  your  firfl  poli 
tical  walks  in  the  year  1780  to  the  year  1800.  The  jour 
ney,  Sir,  has  been  unpleafant  to  ourfelves  but  to  the 
country  we  hope  not  unproiitable.  In  every  ftep  we  have 
advanced,  we  have  beholden  you,  like  a  Proteus,  trans 
forming  yourfelf  with  facility  into  fhapes  adapted  to  your 
various  pafTions  and  projects.  AMBITION,  as  we  have 
fcen,  has  been  the  fpring  to  every  political  a&  of  your 
life,  and  you  have  purfued  it  with  the  conftancy  of  time 
and  a  zeal  that  no  adverfity  could  mitigate.  In  the  pur- 
fuit  of  this  haunting  fpecbe  of  your  mind,  you  have  not 
been  fcrupulous  about  the  means  you  have  ufed  to  attain 
the  fupreme  object  of  your  heart,  the  chief  magiftracy  of 
the  union.  Ambition,  regulated  by  legitimate  defires,  is 
not  only  laudable,  but  conducive  to  public  freedom  and 
national  magnanimity.,  But  that  ambition,  Sir,  that  feeks, 
by  art  and  corruption)  to  fet  at  naught  the  combined  fuf- 


f rages  of  tin  commonwealth,  to  fap  the  foundation  of  the 
itate,  is  more  deftru£iive  than  a  peftilence.     Of  this  na 
ture  is  yaur  AMBITION.     Sir,   you  have  not  only  neflleil 
and  profecuted  with  uncommon  zeal  and  activity  this  a- 
hrming    paflion,  but   lo  !    when    your    ambitious   pro- 
je&s    were    happily   difcovefred    and    unfolded  to    your 
countrymen,    you   had     that    effeminate    boldneis,    the 
very  image  of  a  defperate  character,  to  difavow   them. 
You  have  affixed  your  feal  to  a  denial  that  you  negotiated 
with  the  federalifts  to  d\f appoint  the:    Country  of  the  man  of 
its  choice,   and  place  yourfelf  in  the  executive  chair.     That 
denial,  Sir,  will  feal  your  fate  !     We  will,  in  a  few  days, 
prove  that  in  this,  as  in  every  other  adl  of  your  political 
life,  you  have  fought  to  deceive  your  country.     Let  it  be 
repeated  that,  in  the  year  1788,  you  were  a.federalifl.  Jea- 
loufy,  ambition,  and  difappointment  cauied  you  to  leave  a 
party  from  whom  you  found  nothing  was  to   be  gained. 
You  left  that  party  and  attached  yourfelf  to  the  republican, 
From  the  republican  party  you  obtained  many  favors.     In 
1790,   one   year  only  after  you  took  a  tranfient  leave  of 
the  federaJiits,  you  were  appointed  by  the  republicans  At 
torney-General  of  the  ftate,  and  in  the  year  1791,  a  federal 
Senator.     Honors  were  heaped  profufely  upon  you  with 
out  any  merit  on  your  own.     In  1792,  one  year  after  your 
fenatorial    appointment,    you    abdicated    your   republican 
friends,   and   tendered   your    fervices    to     the   federalijh 
for  the    chair    of     the    State    Government.      In    thefc 
mutations  we  perceive  your  genuine  charader  •,  that  cha- 
radfcer  in  which  you  appeared-to  thofe  who  had  their  eyes 

rivettcd  upon  you,  at  the  Prefidential  election At  this 

D 


election  you  offered  your  fervices  to  the  federalifls,  in  the 
fame  fly  and  fecret  manner,  to  obtain  the  Prefidency.  In 
this,  therefore,  when  your  char  after  is  properly  under- 
flood,  there  is  nothing  marvellous.  It  is  only  a  continua 
tion  of  the  fame  thing  >  it  comports  with  your  uniform 
conduct. 

Your  activity  was  uniformly  apportioned  to  your  felfifh- 
nefs.  You  were  never  active  but  when  you  had  perfonal 
favors  to  expect.  At  the  election  for  Governor  in  1792, 
after  the  federalifts  refufed  to  accept  you  as  their  candi 
date,  you  were  not  to  be  feen  and  fcarcely  to  be  heard  of. 
In  1795,  when  the  republicans  made  choice  of  Judge 
Yates  in  preference  to  yourfelf,  you  retired  in  dudgeon, 
and  neither  moved  your  lips  nor  lilted  your  pen  in  favor 
of  his  election.  In  1 796,  you  rendered  no  affiftance  to 
the  republicans  at  the  election  for  AfTembly-men.  In 
j  797,  you  manifefled  fome  concern  for,  and  contributed 
your  might  to  the  fuccefs  of,  the  republican  ticket  j  but 
let  it  be  remembered,  that  you  were  that  year  a  can 
didate  for  the  AiTembly  !  In  1798,  the  darkeft  period 
the  union  hae  feen  fince  the  revolution,  you  neither  ap 
peared  at  the  republican  meetings,  nor  at  the  polls  ;  you 
neither  planned  in  the  cabinet  nor  acted  in  the  field.  If 
you  were  then  eloquent,  it  was  the  eloquence  of  the 
grave.  At  that  portentious  period,  when  the  greateft  exer 
tions  were  necelTary,  you  manifefted  none.  In  1799  you 
were  (till  in  your  fhell  :  You  were  neither  feen  at  the 
ward  aflemblies  nor  on  the  election  ground.  But  in. 
1800,  you  were  all  activity,  all  zeal.  Every  liga 
ment  of  your  frame  was  brought  into  action.  You  de- 


(     27     ) 

voted  night  and  day  to  the  fucccfs  of  the  Repub 
lican  ticket.  You  attended  all  our  meetings,  and  har- 
rangued  the  aflembled  citizens  at  rnoft.  You  even  flood 
at  the  polls  and  challenged  voters.  All  this  was  admired, 
fince,  without  looking  at  the  motive,  it  was  ierviceabie. 
We  give  you  full  credit  for  your  zeal  and  activity  on  trie 
occafion,  efpecially  as  it  was  the  firft  time  you  exhi 
bited  either.  But  even  here  you  were  the  fame  man. 
You  were  peculiarly  inteieiled  in  the  fuccefs  of  she  elec 
tion.  You  knew  that  you  would  be  candidate  for  the 
Vice-Prefulency,  and  you,  with  the  country  at  large, 
•were  of  opinion  that  the  faccefs  of  the  Prefidential 
election  depended  principally  on  our  triumph  in  that 
of  our  city.  You  had  made  nice  calculations  on 
this  fubjedt,  and  very  clearly  forefaw  the  neceflity 
for  herculean  exertions.  Accordingly  you,  were  all  ani 
mation.  You  were  firft  at  the  meetings,  firft  at  the 
polls.  While  our  citizens  applauded  your  conduct, 
they  were  ignorant  of  your  motives  -  they  knew  little 
of  your  real  character  :  it  had  been  carefully  inveloped  in 
myitery.  Like  theirs,  they  fondly  imagined  that  your  zeal 
and  induftry  were  the  effetl:  of  pure  and  difmterefled  pa- 
triotifm.  Alas  !  Sir,  they  knew  you  not. 


LETTER    VL 

SIR, 

We  are  now  arrived  at  that  important  period  when  it 
becomes  nece&iry  to  take  a  more  critical  view  of  your  in 
trigues. 


We  were  triumphant  in  our  city  election  of  iBoo,  and 
that  triumph  fecured  the  elevation  of  Mr.  Jefferfon  and 
yourfelf.  Congrefs  was  then  in  feflion,  and  before  its  ad 
journment  it  was  necefiary  to  nominate  two  republican 
candidates  for  the  offices  of  Prefident  and  Vice-Prcfident. 
The  Republicans  with  one  voice  were,  from  one  extreme 
of  the  union  to  the  other,  in  favor  cf  Mr.  Jefferfon  for  the 
former  -r  they  thought,  indeed,  of  no  other  man  for  it  •,  in 
him  their  hopes  were  centered.  There  was  fome  difficul 
ty  however  in  chufing  a  proper  perfon  for  the  office  of 
Vice-Prefidency.  The  members  of  Congrefs  made  choice 
of  Governor  Clinton,  but  he  declined  the  offer.  While 
the  choice  of  a  candidate  for  the  Vicc-Prefidency  was 
thus  fufpended,  you  vifited  Philadelphia,  where  Congrefs 
were  then  met,  afibciated  with  the  members,  and  converfed 
with  them  on  the  fubje6L  It  was  deemed  proper  that  the 
Vice-Prefident  fliould  cornc  from  New- York,  and  you  were 
ultimately  agreed  upon  as  the  candidate.  Mr.  Jefferfon 
however  was  the  fupreme  object:  of  the  election  ;  you  were 
brought  in  only  to  complete  the  republican  fyftem . 

No  fooner  were  you  nominated  than  you  fet  in  motion 
a,  moft  refined  and  extenfive  fyftem  of  intrigue.  Your 
mind  embraced  the  union,  and  you  had  agents  inmany  of  the 
flates  to  promote  your  views.  In  this  there  was  fomcthing 
exceedingly  fufpicious.  Why  thefe  agents  if  your  defigns 
were  honed  ?  The  compenfation  of  the  Vice-Pi efidency 
could  have  been  no  temptation  to  you.  One  year's  falary 
of  that  office  would  hardly  defray  the  cxpenfcs  of  your 


(     29     ) 

numerous  agents  fcattered  over  die  union  to  further  your 
ambitious  projects.  You  had  undoubtedly  a  higher  object 
in  view  ;  you  had  fixed  your  eyes  on  the  Prefidency,  and 
adapted  your  machinations  to  its  attainment.  The  faiary 
of  the  Vice-Prefidency  could  have  been  no  adequate  in 
ducement  to  you  to  quit  a  profeffion  which  yield 
ed  double  the  annual  amount  •,  and  every  body  knows  that 
yon  depended  on  that  profcflion  for  fubfiitcnce".  The 
iequel  of  the  fad  tale  will '  mew  that,  to  you,  even  thus 
early,  the  Prefidency,  in  direct  cppofnion  to  the  unequivo 
cal  wifhes  and  expectations  of  the  people,  appeared  an 
attainable  object.  All  yov:r  intrigues,  all  your  movements,, 
fubfequent  to  your  nomination,  tended  directly  to  its 
attainment. 

. 
The  ftate  of  New- York  was  ycur  theatre  of  action,  and 

the  choice  of  the  electors  commanded  all  your  care. 
When  thefe  were  chofen  you  were  a  member  of 
the  State  Afiembly  for  the  county  of  Orange  .•  the  choice 
v/as  made  by  the  State  Legiflature.  On  this  occafion 
you  were  all  vigor  and  activity.  You  were  felicitous 
for  the  appointment  of  one  of  your  bofom  friends, 
and  you  were  eventually  gratified.  The  electors  met  at 
Hudfon.  Sufpicions  however  had  gone  abroad  that 
fome  foul  play  was  intended.  The  period  was  a  critical 
one, 'and  fufpicion,  whether  Jwell  or  ill-founded,  uatu- 
rally  excited  precaution.  The  method  of  voting  by 
ballot,  though  excellent  in  itfelf,  is  admirably  calculated  to 
conceal  treafon.  It  was  neceflary,  therefore,  for  one  or 
two  of  the  ele&ors,"  whofe  fufpicions  were  lively,  and 
who  had  converfed  on  their  mutual  doubts,  to  devife 


(     3°     ) 

a  plan  whereby  the  vote  of  each  might  be  feen  by  • 
whole,  without  giving  offence  to  any.  This  was  done 
in  the  following  manner  : 

General  Floyd  was  made  chairman.  Pierre  Van  Court* 
iaadt,  Efq.  fat  accidently  at  the  table  next  to  the  pen,  ink 
and  paper.  This  gentleman  was  requefted  by  one  of  the 
electors  to  write  him  a  ticket  for  Thomas  Jefferfon  and 
Aaron  Burr.  Whether  Mr.  Van  Courtlandt  took  the 
hint  or  not  we  cannot  fay  ,  but  he  very  re?dUy  fell  into 
the  meafure,  wrote  one  for  himfelf,  and  {hewed  it  to  the 
electors.  He  was  then  ailced  by  General  Floyd  to  write 
him  a  firuilar  ticket  :  he  did  fo.  This  was  rtp^ut-jd  by 
a  third  elector,  and  fo  on  until  in  this  way  Mr. 
Van  Courtlandt  wrote  nearly  the  whole  of  the  electoral 
tickets.  If  one  of  the  electors  entertained  improper  de- 
ilgns,  this  method,  to  all  appearances  inadvertently  adopt 
ed,  was  well  calculated  to  defeat  them.  Every  ticket  was 
feen  by  the  electors. 

Timehas  {hewn  the  wifdom  of  the  precaution.  One  of  the 
electors,!  nominated  by  Mr.  Burr  in  the  legiflature,  after 
wards  faid,  at  the  houfe  of  the  Mayor  of  Hudfon,  that 
if  he  could  have  known  that  Mr.  Jefferfon  and  Mr.  Burr 
would  have  had  an  equal  number  of  votes,  he  would 
have  dropped  iVJr.  Jefferfon  !  We  ftate  this  fact  on  un- 
queftionable  authority.  Left,  however,  an  inference 
unfavorable  to  the  Mayor  of  Hudfon,  fliould  be  drawn 
from  the  fimple  fa£t  of  the  expreffion  having  been  ufed 
at  his  houfe,  it  is  deemed  proper  to  fay,  that  that  gen- 

f  Mr.  Lefp'mwd* 


(     3'     ) 

tleman  is  and  always  was  a  warm  and  fincere  friend  of 
Mr.  Jefferfon. 

Such  is  the  fact  from  which  the  reader  will  make  his 
own  inference,  Let  it  be  added,  Sir,  that  the  elector  is 
now  devoted  to  you,  and  unfriendly  to  the  adminiitration. 

After  the  electoral  affairs  vere  fixed  to  your  mind  in 
New- York,  you  vifited  Connecticut  and  Rhode-Iiland. 
You  returned  from  Khode-Hland  with  the  moft  flattering 
accounts.  You  ftated  that  there  was  every  probability 
that  Mr.  jefferibn  would  have  one  if  not  two  of 
the  votes  of  that  (late,  and  yourfelf  none  \  This, 
Sir,  we  repeat,  was  flattering,  fmce  there  was  not, 
we  will  venture  to  fay,  a  faithful  Republican  in  the  union 
who  wifhed  that  equality  of  votes  which  was  afterwards 
deplored  :  it  was  hoped  that  Mr.  Jefferfon  would  have  one 
or  two  votes  more  than  yourfelf  to  avoid  an  appeal  to  the 
decifion  of  the  Houfe  of  Representatives.  It  is  known 
that  Mr.  Jefferfon  had  not  one  of  the  Rhode-Ifland  votes  ; 
nor  was  there  any  probability  that  he  would  have.  But 
you  had  an  object  to  accomplifh  by  the  report.  You  wilhed 
an  equality  of  votes,  without  which  you  could  do  no 
thing  ;  and  you  were  afraid  that  a  fouthern  ftate  would 
omit  your  name  on  one  or  two  votes,  if  the  electors  thereof 
were  not  induced  to  believe  that  a  Hate  call  of  the  Hudfoit 
would  give  Mr.  Jefferfon  one  vote  at  leaft  more  than  your- 
felf.  Hence  you  not  only  propagated  that  report  yourfelf, 
but  your  confidential  friends  were  alfo  bufily  employed 
in  writing  letters  to  the  fouthern  dates,  reprefenting  it  as 
certain  that  Mr.  Jefferfon  would  have  two  votes  in  Rhode*. 
and  yourfelf  none.  "We  could  mention  the  names 


(     3-     ) 

of  peifqns.who  wrote  fuch  letters  •;  but  as  they  are  now 
y  repentant  it  would  be  improper. 


By  fuch  arts,  an  equality  of  'electoral  votes  was  effect 
ed.  It  was  defirabie  to  prevent  the  election  of  a  federal- 
ill  to  the  Vice-Prefidency  •,  and  it  was  known  that  if  ma'- 
ny  votes  were  diverted  from  you,  one  of  the  federal  candi 
dates  urn  ft  fucceed.  It  was  enough  therefore  for  the 
fbuthern  ftates  to  be  aiTured,  by  perfons  whofe  infidelity. 
K>  the  caufe  was  unknown  and  unfufpecled,  that  Mr.  Jef- 
feribn  would  have  two  votes  more  than  yourfelf  to  the  eaft- 
xyard  of  the  North-River.  They  werelaught  to  believe 
i  his,  and-  the  confequence  of  the  intrigue  was  that  even 
tually  you  had  an  equality  of  votes  with  Mr.  JeiFerfun. 


LETTER     VII. 

SIR,  ' 

AFTER  your  return  from  Connecticut  and  Khodc- 
Ifland,  you  turned  your  attention  to  the  fouthern  Hates. 
It  iff  not  neceffary  todefcribe  the  fituation  of  Pennfylvania 
reipe<5ting  the  Presidential  election  ;  it  is  well  known. 
The  .  pertinacity  of  the  "  Spartan  Band"  was  regretted 
by.  no  man  more  than  yourfelf. — Had  the  fifteen 
votes  of  that  refpe£table  ftate  been  republican,  you  had 
caufe  to  believe  "your  election  to  the  Presidency  would 
have  been  certain.  You  were  then,  as  you  are  now,  ex 
ceedingly  intimate  'with  Mr.  Dayton.  This  intimacy 
partqdk  at  that  time  as  it  does  now,  more  of  affcttionatc 
tordiality^  and, was  cementpd  by  more  mutual  good  offices, 
than  are  generally  to  be  found  among  gentlemen  of  oppo- 


(33    ) 

rite  political  fentiments.  Your  connexion  had,  at  it 
now  has,  a  fufpicious  afpccl.  General  Dayton  declared 
fmce  the  election,  that  if  all  the  votes  of  Pennfylvania  had 
been  republican,  it  was  a  fixed  plan  for  New-Jerfey  to  give 
you  as  many  votes  as  would  have  made  you  Prefidcnt. 
We  have  this  important  facl  from  authority  that  we  can 
not  doubt.  And  who  that  witncflcd  the  conteft  in  the 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  will  queftion  the  cxiftence  of 
fuch  a  projecl  ?  If  the  entire  of  the  Pennfylvania  vote» 
had  been  given  to  Mr.  Jefferfon  and  yourfelf,  federal  op- 
pofition  would  hav«  ceafed  ;  the  fcderalifts  could  have  had 
no  hopes  of  fuccefs.  They  would  have  endeavored  to  ef 
fect  that  by  4ap  which  they  could  not  atchievc  by  num 
bers.  They  would,  even  according  to  General  Dayton^ 
have  reforted  to  that  expedient  "  to  counteract  the  wiftiei 
and  expectations  of  the  people"  which  eventually  in  the 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  they  embraced.  They  were  de 
termined  to  go  all  lengths  to  prevent  the  election  of  Mr. 
JefFcrfon. 

In  the  full  knowledge  of  that  projecl  you  had  an  agent 
at  Lancafter,  the  feat  of  government  of  Pennfylvania,  to 
do  every  thing  in  his  power  to  haften  it.  This  agent  went 
from  your  houfe,  he  is  one  of  your  confidential  friends,  he 
was  f  urniflied  by  you  with  letters  of  recommendation,  and 
in  turn,  there  is  reafon  to  believe,  he  fent  you  difpatchet 
detailing  the  fuccefs  of  his  miflion.  We  had  faid  that  w« 
believed  hit  views  were  honeft  ;  we  now  repeat  the  af- 
fcrtion  ;  but  thii  makei  him  not  a  jot  the  kfi  your  agent  § 

£ 


(     34     ) 

it  only  acquits  him,  in  our  eftimation,  of  collufion  with 
yourfelf.  But  his  agency  was  unproductive.  No  im- 
preflion  could  be  made  on  the  federal  members  of  the 
3Pennfylvania  fenate.  The  modern  was  more  fuccefsful 
than  the  ancient  Spartan  Band.  The  BriiiJJj  mimjier  wa* 
there  !  and  the  federalifts  triumphed  in  their  iniquity. 

Meantime,  Sir,  you  had  your  eye  on  South-Caroling. 
You  had  an  agent,  Mr.  Timothy  Greene  of  this  city,  at 
Columbia,  the  feat  of  government  of  that  ftate.  It  was 
queftionable  whether  South-Carolina  would  give  you  a 
fmgle  vote.  At  that  period  you  were  fcarcely  known  in 
"the  ftate.  Mr.  Greene  was  at  Columbia  at  lead  two 
'months.  He  was  your  eulogift ;  your  interceffbr.  Be 
fent  difpatches  regularly  ;  they  were  addrefled  to  Mr. 
John  S  wart  w  out  of  this  city  under  cover,  and  by  him 
"communicated  to  you.  At  length  eight  republican  electors 
'were  chofen  ;  and  as  they  imagined  that  no  harm  could 
refult  to  the  country  from  your  rifmg  to  power  with  Mr. 
Jefferfon,  they  voted  for  you  in  company  with  this  illuf- 
'trious  ftatefman. 

:      The  South-Carolina  votes  completed  the  equality,  and 
:  thofe  who  had  dreaded  an  appeal  to  the  Houfe  of  Repre- 
-  fentatives  now  became  alarmed.     The  plots  of  the  federal 
ifts  were  well  known  ;  their  defperation  and  vindi&ive- 
nefs  hot  lefs  fo.     We  had  every  thing  to  fear  from  their 
machinations,  and  nothing  to  hope  from  their  juftice, 

On  the  1 6th  day  of  December,  1800,  information  from 
your  agent,  Mr.  Greene,  was  received  in  this  city  detailing 


(    35    ) 

the  names  of  the  South-Carolina  ele&ors,  and  dating,  un 
equivocally,  that  previons  to  their  appointment^1  they  were 
pledged  to  vote  for  Mr.  Jefflrfon  and  yourfelf.  Ihis  ren 
dered  our  knowledge  of  the  equality  of  votes  between  Mr. 
JcfFerfon  and  yourfelf  as  certain  as  if  known  hy  official  an 
nunciation,  'i  he  mail  that  brought  the  letter  from  Mr. 
Greene,  and  which  was  publifhed  in  this  city  on  the  i6th 
day  of  December,  it  is  prefumable,  brought  you  the  fame 
information,  and  from  the  fr.me  perfon.  Hence  it  may' 
be  inferred  that  on  the  i6th  day  of  December  you  were 
certain  that  the  electoral  votes  between  Mr.  Jefferfon  and 
yourfelf  were  equal.  Yet  on  the  fame  day  you  wrote  your 
celebrated  epiftle  to  General  Samuel  Smith  of  Baltimore, 
in  which  you  fay,  we  believe  contrary  to  the  information 
received  by  you  from  Mr.  Greene,  and  on  which  you  un 
doubtedly  relied,  '«  It  is  highly  improbable  that  I  (hall  have 
an  equal  number  of  votes  with  Mi.  Jefferfon."  The  fol 
lowing  is  your  letter  to  General  Smith.  It  is  peculiarly 
proper  at  this  time  to  give  it  circulation. 

'«  Extra  ft  of  a  letter  from  Colonel  Burr  to  General  Smith  of 

Baltimore^  dated  Nenv-Tork,  December  i6th>  1801. 
"  It  is  highly  improbable  that  I  fhall  have  an  equal 
number  of  votes  with  Mr.  Jefferfon  :  but  if  fuch  (hould  be 
the  refult,  every  man  who  knows  me  ought  to  know  that 
I  would  utterly  difclaim  all  competition.  Be  affured  that 
the  federal  party  can  entertain  no  wifh  for  fuch  an  ex 
change.  As  to  my  friends,  they  would  difhonor  my  views 
and  infult  my  feelings,  by  a  fufpicion  that  I  would  fubmit 
to  be  inftrumental  in  counteracting  the  wifhes  and  ex 
pectations  of  the  United  States.  And  I  now  conftitute 
you  my  proxy  to  declare  thefe  fentitnents,  if  the  occafion 
(hall  require." 


(    3*    ) 

This  letter,  which  gave  n$  authority  to  General  Smith 
to  publifh  it,  but  which  he  very  properly  did,  afforded 
fome  fatisfaclion  at  the  time  to  thofe  wl  o  thought  you  a 
faithful  politician.  But,  Sir,  if  you  had  meant  it  for  pub 
lication,  and  in  fact  and  with  fmcciity  to  ««  difclaim  all 
competition  with  Mr.  Jefferfon,"  it  was  of  a  nature  fo  e- 
quivocal  as  to  be  inefficacious.  Had  you  "  really  meant 
to  difclaim  all  competition  with  l^r.  Jefferfon,"  there  is 
one  way,  which  muft  have  been  obvious  to  yourfelf  at 
the  time,  in  which  you  might  have  done  fo  effectually. 
You  ought,  Sir,  to  have  faid  "  it  is  evidently  the  wi(h  of 
the  people  to  place  X'r.  Jefferfon  at  the  head  of  the  gov 
ernment  ;  and  it  is  probable,  from  the  ufual  conduct  of 
the  federalifts,  that,  to  difappoint  the  people,  they  may  at 
tempt  to  place  the  adminiftration  in  my  hands.  I  fliould 
cordially  contemn  fo  improper  an  aft.  I  will  never  ac 
cept  it  from  them.  Should  they  by  menace  or  by  intrigue, 
by  force  or  by  fraud,  be  enabled  to  commit  the  executive 
power  to  my  guidance,  I  will  injiantly  reftgn  it  to  him  t$ 
whtm  tkt  people  have  txcluftvely  ellotttd  it.  I  will  accept 
no  office  contrary  to  their  will." 

But,  Sir,  it  did  not  exactly  fuit  your  views  to  be  thus 
explicit.  You  did  mean  to  "  counteract  the  wi(hes  and 
expectations  of  the  people,"  it  (hall  be  our  bufinefg  to 
prove  this  in  our  next  letter. 


(     37    ) 
LETTER     V11L 

M  The  Miniftcr,  who  by  fccret  corruption  invades  the  free- 
*'  dom  of  citation,  and  the  ruffian,  \vho  by  optti  violence  oe- 
41  ftroys  that  freedom,  arc  embarked  in  the  fame  bottom.9' 

jUNiUS. 

TO  THE  PEOPLE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

WE  arc  aware  of  the  importance  of  the  fubje£t  in 
which  we  have  for  fome  time  been  engaged.  We  have 
viewed  it  in  all  its  afpecls,  and  contemplated  all  its  pro 
bable  confequences.  Since  June,  1801,  we  have  per 
ceived  fomething  in  Mr.  Burr  and  in  his  a&s,  that  alarm 
ed  us.  From  the  firft  moment  our  fufpicions  were  ex 
cited  we  watched  him  attentively  until  thofc  fufpicions 
ripened  unto  confirmed  belief,  that  he  was  purfuing  pro 
jects  difhonorable  to  himfelf  and  unfafe  to  his  country. 
Nor  was  this  belief  predicated  on  light  furmifes,  or  vague 
report.  We  knew  that  he  poflefled  fentiments  hoftile  to 
the  executive  ;  a  fpirit  intent  on  perfonal  aggrandize 
ment,  and  inflamed  by  improper  defires.  And  yet,  fenfi- 
ble  as  we  were  that  his  conduct  was  a  fit  fubje£t  for 
public  inveftigation  and  difclofure,  we  could  not  but  fore- 
fee  that  to  dp  either  without  fucccfs  would  involve  us  in 
pecuniary  rum,  .and  draw  upon  us  public  difgrace.  Had 
we  confulted  perfonal  intereft^  we  (hould  have  beholden  in 
filent  but  forrowful  amaze  the  Operation  of  fchemc* 
which,  iri  our  opinion,  were  dangerous  to  the  freedom  of 
the  country.  But  unaided  and  unfupported  we  refolved, 
whatever  might  be  the  iflue,  to  unfold  thofe  plans  and 
affuil  thofe  actions  which  appeared  to  u§  alike  unjuft  and 


alarming.  We  did  net,  however,  long  ftand  alone  ;  and 
we  difcovered  that  the  more  his  conduct  was  examined, 
the  more  odious  it  appeared. 

We  have  entered  fully  into  an  examination  of  his  con- 
<lu6t,  and  found  it  uniform  only  in  the  purfuit  of  what 
ever  had  a  tendency  to  raife  hirnfelf  to  power.  As  a  po* 
litician,  he  has  been  inconftant.  In  all  his  tranfitions  from 
one  party  to  the  other,  his  motives  have  been  apparent. 
At  one  period  he  was  a  federally  at  another  a  repub 
lican,  as  belt  fuited  his  views,  or  promifed  to  grati 
fy  his  inordinate  de fires.  Ambition  has  guided  all  his 
fteps  ;  cunning  marked  his  career  ;  and  that  laxity  of 
principle  which  diftinguifhed  the  Cxfars,  the  Cromwells, 
and  the  Bonapartesof  the  old  world,  has  been  apparent  in 
his  walks.  In  1789,  he  left  the  federalifls  and  joined  the 
republicans  for  a  high  office,  and  was  gratified  ;  and  in 
1792  he  madefecrtt  overtures  to  rejoin  the  fedcralifts  for 
a  higher  office,  but  was  not  gratified,  which  has  been 
eftablifhed  in  a  former  letter.  Is  it  then  furprifing  that, 
in  1800,  a  third  attempt  was  covertly  made  by  Mr.  Burr, 
to  attach  himfelf  to  the  federal  party  to  compafs  the  Pre- 
fidency  ?  In  this  we  perceive  a  confiftency  of  character  ; 
an  uniformity  of  conducl. 

In  a  late  pamphlet,  entitled  «  A  View,"  &c.  Mr.  Burr 
5s  accufed  with  having  negotiated  with  a  federal  gentleman 
to  place  hJmfef/fin  the  executive  shair  at  the  late  prefidential 
ele£Hcn*  After  a  long  filence  he  has  thought  proper 
publicly  and  in  the  fullefl  and  moft  unqualified  manner, 
to  deny  the  accufation.  The  facl  is  unqueflionable,  dif 
ficult  as  the  proof  may  be  of  accefs.  Mr,  Burr,  however, 


(    39    ) 

and  the  writer  of  the  "  View"  are  now  fairly  at  iilue  ;  and 
as  we  know  the  charge  to  be  well  founded,  we  ha,  e  vo 
luntarily  undertaken  to  prove  it.  In  doing  this  it  will  be 
proper  firft  to  lay  the  allegation  before  the  reader,  and  fe- 
condly,  Mr.  Burr's  denigl. 

The  accufation  is  contained  in  the  following  words  : 

"  Mr.  Burr,  whi'e  in  the  city  of  Ncw-Totk,  carried  on 
"  a  negotiation  'with  the  heads  of  the  federal  party  at  Wa/h- 
u  ington,  -with  a  view  to  his  eleclion  as  Prefident  of  the  U- 
<c  nited  States*  Jl  perfon  was  authorifed  by  them  to  confer 
"  with  him  on  the  fubjeft,  who  accordingly  did  fo.  Mr.  Burr 
"  ajjented  to  the  proportions  of  the  negotiator  and  referred  him 
"  to  his  confidential  friend  to  complete  the  negotiation.  Mr. 
«'  Burr  Jlated  that  after  the  firjl  vote  taken  in  the  Hcttfe  of 
"  Reprefentativesy  Nrw-Tork  and  Ttnnejfee  'would  give  in  to 

«  thefederali/ts." 

View,  p.  57 — 8. 

Mr,  Burr's  denial  of  this  charge  is  couched  in  the 
fucceeding  terms. 

«'  Ton  are  at  liberty  to  declare  from  me,  that  all  thofi 
«  charges  and  inftnuations  which  aver  or  in  timate  that  I  ad- 
fs  iiifed  or  countenanced  the  oppofitien  made  to  Mr.  jftferfon 
(( pending  the  late  eleclion  and  ballotting  for  Prefident  ;  that 
««  /  propofed  or  agreed  to  any  terms  with  ihe  federal  party  > 
*s  that  I  ajfented  to  be  held  up  in  oppofition  to  him,  or  attempt- 
**  ed  to  withdraw  from  him  the  vote  or  fupport  of  any  man, 
"  whether  In  or  out  of  Congrefs  ;  THAT  ALL  SUC&  AS- 


(     40     ) 

«  SERT10N9   AND    INTIMAT10X3    AR&    PAL3&    AN9 
"  GROUNDLESS" 

Mr.  Burr's  letter  to  Gorernor  Bloom- 
field,  dated  Sept.  21,  1802. 

If  Mr.  Burr's  denial  be  true  he  is  innocent,  as  far  at 
it  concerns  this  capital  charge,  and  ought  to  receive  from 
his  country  a  full  and  entire  acquital  ;  but  if  guilty,  then 
ought  that  guilt  to  feal  his  political  fate  and  banifh  him 
forever  from  the  trull  and  affc£Uoni  of  the  people. 

Few  men  believe  that  Mr.  Burr  is  innocent  ;  many 
ftrongly  fufpe&  that  he  is  guilty  of  the  charge  exhibit 
ed,  and  almofl  all  are  of  opinion  that  he  has  manag 
ed  the  negociation  with  fo  much  caution,  dexterity, 
and  art,  as  to  defy  the  production  of  proof.  The 
latter  opinion  is  drawn  from  the  known  fubtilty  of 
his  character,  the  general  fecrecy  of  his  movements,  and 
his  fcrupulous  avoidance  to  commit  to  writing  any  thing 
which  may,  by  pcffibility  of  accident,  involve  him  in  fe- 
rious  inconveniences.  The  known  care  and  cunning  too 
of  Mr.  Burr,  it  is  generally  and  juftly  fuppofed,  would  be 
increafed  in  proportion  to  the  iniquity  of  the  tranfatUon, 
and  the  confequenc'-s  likely  to  refult  from  it  to  him- 
felf  in  cafe  of  a  difciofure. — All  thcfe  confiderations,  to 
which  Mr.  Burr  paid  fuitable  attention,  and  which  he  nw 
doubt  perceived  before  he  embarked  in  the  negociation, 
render,  it  is  true,  the  production  of  proof  difficult.  And 
this  difficulty  becomes  augmented  when  we  confider  that 
the  negociation  took  place  and  was  completed  folely  be 
tween  Mr.  Burr  and  the  federalifts,  and  that  it  is  equally 


(     41     ) 

the  hitereft  of  both  parties  to  keep  it  a  profound  fecret. 
From  the  nature  of  the  tranfa&ion,  and  the  motives  and 
objects  of  the  two  contracting  parties,  proof,  muft  be  dif 
ficult  of  accefs,  fince  this  proof,  it  is  fair  to  infer,  is  ex- 
clufively  in  the  pofleflion  of  Mr.  Burr  and  the  federal  ne- 
gociator.  Nor  can  it  be  fuppofed  that  Mr.  Burr  would 
be  a  felf  accufer,  or  that  the  federalifts  would  be  guilty 
of  an  a£t  that  would  enevitably  injure  their  party. — 
They  are  fenfible  that  a  divifion  exifts  among  the  re 
publicans  ;  that  this  divifion  is  occafioned  by  the  machina 
tions  of  Mr.  Burr;  that  it  is  propitious  to  their  views, 
and  that  to  difclofe  the  teftimony  which  would  compofe 
thofe  divifions,  would  injure  their  party,  inafmuch  as  it 
would  unite  the  republicans  not  only  againft  that  party, 
but  againft  the  man  -who  has  in  the  moft  alarming 
manner  attempted  to  betray  their  confidence.  Mr.  Burr, 
therefore,  and  the  federalifts  feel  every  inducement  that 
can  poflibly  exift  to  keep  back  the  proof.  The  federal  party 
{till  hope  to  profit  by  Mr.  Burr's  convenient  difpofition  and 
to  triumph  on  our  divifion.  When  thefe  things  are  con- 
fidered  if  will  not  be  furprifing  if  we  mould  fail  to  lay  be 
fore  our  country  the  fulleft  and  moft  fatisfaftory  proof  of 
Mr.  Burr's  tiegociation  ;  and  although  it  will  not  be  deem 
ed  probable,  under  all  the  circumftances  of  the  cafe,  that 
more  than  presumptive  teftimony  can  be  adduced,  yet  we 
(hall  prove  fubftantially  the  negociation,  and  that  it  was 
entered  into  by  Mr.  Burr  to  ciFed  his  eledion  to  thePre* 
fidential  chair. 

F 


(    4*     ) 

The  following  communication  is  written  by  a 
gentleman  of  unblemimed  character  •,  one  who  is  a 
member  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Abeel's  congregation,  and  who 
informs  us  —and  we  place  the  utmoft  confidence  in  his 
information — that  the  ideas  and  the  language  of  it  arc 
precifely  thofe  of  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr.  Linn  ;  and  although 
its  publication  is  not  ftrictly  authorifed  by  Mr.  Abeel  and 
Dr.  Linn,  yet  the  fpirit  and  the  language  of  it  are  em 
phatically  their  own.  Neither  of  thofe  two  gentlemen 
will  contradict  in  public  or  in  private,  the  facts  fiated  in 
the  communication.  And  though  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr. 
Linn  are  not  pledged  to  us  to  maintain  thofe  facts  ;  al 
though  indeed  we  have  not  had  a  perfonal  interview  with 
cither,  yet  they  are  bound  in  honor  and  in  truth  to  fup- 
port  the  veracity  of  him  who  has  been  fo  obliging  as  to 
make  to  us  the  communication.  If  it  be  alked  why  the 
communicator  does  not  avow  his  name,  we  anfwer  that 
there  is  no  occafion  for  fuch  an  avowal,  fince  Mr.  Abeel 
and  Dr.  Linn  will  not  nor  cannot  contradict  the  facts  it 
contains.  If,  however,  contrary  to  expectation,  they 
fhould  contradict  or  endeavour  to  weaken  thofe  facts, 
then  the  communicator  is  pledged  to  fupport  them  by 
affidavit.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  Dr.  Linn,  Mr.  A- 
beel,  and  the  communicator,  refide  in  this  city. 

New-Fork,  June  2$th,    1802. 
Gentlemen, 

«  Dr.  Linn  and  the  Reverend  Mr.  Abeel  of  this  city 
"  told  me,  in  a  converfation  I  had  with  them,  that  they 
«  believed  Aaron  Burr,  Efq.  had  correfponded  with  feds- 


(     43     ) 

<•  ral  members  of  Congrefs  to  get  himfclf  elected  Pre- 
"  fident  of  the  United  States,  and  that  he  had  agreed  to 
«  come  into  their  meafures.  Some  time  after,  I  faw  Mr. 
"  Abeel  and  he  faid  it  was  a  miitake  that  Mr.  Burr 
"  had  correfponded  with  federal  members  of  Congrefs,  but 
"  he  had  made  a  verbal  agreement  with  them,  and 
"  that  if  I  wanted  an  invefcigation  of  the  bufmefs  the 
"  perfon  was  then  in  town  who  would  prove  the  fact." 

"  Note.  I  afked  Dr.  Linn  his  reafon  for  believing  that 
«  the  correfpondence  took  place  ?  He  replied  that  it 
«  could  be  proved  in  a  court  of  juftice,  and  Mr.  Abeel 
"  fubjoined  that  he  would  vouch  for  its  truth." 

June  26. 

«  I  called  on  Mr.  Abeel  this  day  and  told  him  that  I 
"  was  going  to  make  public  what  he  and  Dr.  Linn  had 
"  communicated  to  me  refpe&ing  Mr.  Burr.  Mr.  Abeel 
«  faid  that  although  the  agreement  which  Mr.  Burr  had 
«  made  with  the  federalifts,  was  not  told  to  him  as  a  fecret, 
«c  yet,  as  the  gentleman  who  was  his  author  had  the  cha- 
*f  raEler  of  Mr.  Burr  in  bis  hands,  he  would  not  perhaps 
"  wifh  his  name  to  be  given  up  without  his  confent.  Mr. 
«'  Abeel  promifed  to  fee  him  between  this  day  and  Mon- 
"  day  next." 

June  28. 

'« I  called  on  Mr.  Abeel  and  aflced  him  whether  he 
"  had  feen  the  gentleman  above  referred  to  ?  He  an- 
«  fwered  no,  but  that  he  had  confidered  the  fubjecT:  and 
"  did  not  think  his  informant  would  contradict 
'<  what  he  had  faid,  but  that  he  was  afraid  it  would 
«  produce  a  duel  between  him  and  Mr.  Burr.  I  then 
u  told  him  that  I  would  make  public  what  he  had 


(     44     ) 

<*  communicated  to  me.   He  faid,  well !  but  added  that  it 
«'  might  be   attended   with   difagreeable   confequences." 

Such  is  the  communication  of  our  friend. 

It  is  probable  that  Mr.  Abeel  was  made  acquainted 
with  the  negociation  entered  into  between  Mr.  Burr  and 
the  federal  gentleman  by  the  negociator  himfelf  •,  for  fo 
firmly  was  he  perfuaded  that  Mr.  Burr  had  cordially 
received  the  negociator  and  aflented  to  his  propofi- 
tionSj  that  he  authorised  the  gentleman,  who  communi 
cated  to  us  the  above  information,  to  repeat  it  to  Mr. 
Burr,  and  to  add  that  {V  r.  Abeel  was  his  arithor.  The 
gentleman  did  not,  however,  communicate  the  informa 
tion  to  Mr,  Burr,  but  he  frankly  gave  it  to  us  for  the  ufe  of 
the  writer  of  the  "  View."  Accordinly  it  was  introduced 
into  that  work,  which  Mr.  Burr  has  read.  [v,r.  Abeel 
snd  Dr.  Linn  are  the  two  clergymen  mentioned  in  it,  and 
were  generally  known  as  fuch.  Thus  fituated,  <X,r.  Burr 
could  hardly  do  lefs  than  vifit  Dr.  Linn  and  Mr.  Abeel 
on  the  fubjecl:.  The  following  fa£ts  are  alfo  from 
Dr.  Linn  and  Mr.  Abeel,  and,  like  the  communication 
jufl  read,  will  not  be  contradicted.  After  confiderable 
time  had  elapfed,  Mr.  Burr  fent  to  Dr.  Linn  a  friend, 
who  alked  him  to  fign  a  certificate  for  Mr.  Burr.  This 
certificate  dated  that  the  information  given  by  Dr.  Linn 
to  the  gentleman  who  had  communicated  it  to  us  for  pub 
lication  in  the  "  View,"  was  derived  from  common  report* 
The  bearer  of  the  certificate  fubjoined,  that  Mr.  Burr 
wifhed  Dr.  Linn  to  do  no  more  than  fimply  to  certify  that 
he  got  his  information  concerning  the  negociation  from 


(    45     ) 

Common  report.  Dr.  Linn  fent  for  Mr.  Abcel  to  confult 
him  on  the  fubjeft.  Mr.  Abecl  waited  on  Dr.  Linn 
accordingly  Dr.  Linn  in  the  prefence  of  the  bearer 
of  the  certificate,  afked  Mr.  Abeel  whether  he  would  fign 
it  ?  Mr.  Abeel  replied  no,  Dr.  Linn,  you  cannot  ;  the 
information  we  gave  of  Mr.  Burr's  negociation  <was  not 
obtained  from  common  report.  Dr.  Linn  then  faid  he 
could  not  fign  the  certificate  and  the  bearer  of  it  took  his 
leave. 

Mr.  Burr  afterwards  wrote  a  note  to  Dr.  Linn  requeft- 
ing  a  conference  with  him  at  his  houfe  alone — When  the 
note  was  received,  Dr.  Linn  again  fent  for  Mr.  Abeel  to 
confer  with  him  on  the  folicited  interview.  Mr.  Abeel 
advifed  Dr.  Linn  to  avoid  a  conference  with  Mr. 
Burr  along)  and  exprefled  a  readinefs  to  accompany 
him  provided  Mr.  Burr  would  receive  them  together. 
This  was  agreed  upon,  and  they  accordingly  waited  on 
Mr.  Burr  at  his  ciun  houfe,  where  an  interview  was  had  in 
the  prefence  of  a  gentleman  whofe  name  is  to  us  unknown. 
Mr,  Burr  addrefled  hknfelf  to  Dr.  Linn  and  very  politely 
enquired  whether  the  information  flated  in  the  "  View" 
concerning  his  negociation  with  the  federalifts,  and  faid 
to  have  come  from  two  refpe&able  clergymen  in  this 
city,  was  not  derived  by  them  from  common  report  ? 
Mr.  Abeel  faid  no — the  information  was  not  derived 
from  common  report.  Dr.  Linn  coincided  with  Mr. 
Abeel.  A  paufe  enfued.  Mr.  Abeel  fays  that  he  ex 
pected  IVfr.  Burr  would  have  immediately  enquired 
"  from  whom,  gentlemen,  did  you  receive  the  informa- 


(    46    ) 

tion  ?'*  but  that  no  fuch  enquiry  was  made  ;  no  fucn 
queftion  afked.  Mr.  Burr  manifefted  no  difpofition  to 
fift  the  matter  fo  clofely  :  he  enquired  no  further  about 
it.  &/!r.  Abeel  then  obferved  that  himfelf  and  Dr.  Linn 
had  given  the  information  to  the  gentleman  who  com 
municated  it  to  us  for  publication  in  the  "  View"  and 
that  they  were  bound  to  fupport  his  veracity  :  they  were 
lorry  to  fay  any  thing  againft  Mr.  Burr,  &c.  Mr.  Burr 
thanked  them  for  their  politenefs  and  they  retired. 

This  is  a  faithful  narrative  of  this  fingular  interview, 
011  which  we  hope  we  may  be  permitted  to  offer  a  few 
remarks. 

The  extreme  folicitude  of  Mr.  Burr  to  procure  a 
certificate  from  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr.  Linn,  importing 
that  they  had  received  their  information  concerning 
his  negociation  with  a  federal  gentleman  from  common 
report,  plainly  indicates  a  difpofition  to  defend  him 
felf  againft  the  principal  charge  exhibited  in  the  *'  View" 
in  the  moil  conclufive  manner.  That  he  has  not  vindi 
cated  himfelf  by  teflimony  ;  that  he  has  not  given  to  the 
world  other  and  better  proof  than  his  own  denial  of 
the  negociation,  is  folely  attributable  to  his  incapacity  to 
do  more.  The  charge  is  of  fo  ferious  a  nature,  and, 
from  the  known  character  of  Mr.  Burr,  fo  probable,  as  to 
have  induced  him  to  call  into  action  every  power  of  his 
mind  to  repel  it.  Accordingly  he  availed  himfelf  of  the 
only  alternative  that  promifed  fuccefs.  Mr.  Burr  had 
reafon  to  believe  that  Mr.  Abeel,  if  not  Drt 


(    47     ) 

Linn,  had  been  informed  of  the  negotiation  by  the 
negeciator  himfelf.  Still  he  deemed  it  pojffible  to  ob 
tain  from  them  a  certificate  purporting  that  common 
report  was  their  authority.  Even  fuch  a  certificate 
would  have  been  confoling  to  Mr.  Burr,  and  no  doubt 
publifhed  with  'great  ^triumph  ;  and  this,  knowing, 
as  he  did,  the  conne&ion  of  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr. 
Linn  with  the  negociator,  was  the  only  one  for  which 
he  could  alk.  Hence  thofe  gloomy  reflections  which 
fealed  his  lips,  when  the  certificate  was  in  facT:  twice 
refufed,  may  be  readily  accounted  for.  But  why  did 
not  Mr.  Burr  afk,  when  Mr.  Abeel  boldly  faid  we  did 
not  receive  the  information  from  common  report ,  from 
whom,  then,  was  it  derived  ?  If  the  monitor  with 
in  had  not  proclaimed  his  guilt,  had  he  not  negociat- 
cd  with  federalifts  to  place  himfelf  in  the  Prefidency, 
would  he  not  have  faid,  with  an  air  of  innocent  triumph, 
if  you  received  not  your  information  from  common  re 
port,  from  whom  was  it  derived  ?  I  deny  that  it  ia 
true  •,  I  defy  the  world  to  prove  it  ;  I  challenge  in- 
veftigation  of  it ;  I  infift  that  you  had  your  informa 
tion  from  common  report,  fince  it  has  no  foundation  in 
truth.  Would  not  a  guiltlefs  man,  accufed  of  an  offence 
fo  enormous,  have  demanded  from  whom  the  two  Rev 
erend  Gentlemen  had  obtained  their  information  ?  Mr. 
Burr,  however,  made  no  fuch  enquiry. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  refufal  of  Dr.  Linn  and 
Mr.  Abeel  to  give  the  required  certificate,  evinces 
their  implicit  reliance  on  the  fource  of  their  informa 


(     4«     ) 

tion  ;  that  they  had  good  caufe  to  deem  it  correct ;  that 
they  were  in  facl:  almoft  as  certain  that  Mr.  Burr  had 
negotiated  to  place  himfelf  in  the  Prefidential  chair,  as  if 
they  had  themfelves  been  the  negociators.  The  refufal  is 
not,  indeed,  conclufive  proof  of  the  negotiation,  but  it 
{hews,  in  a  clear  point  of  view,  that  Mr.  Abeel  and 
Dr.  Linn  had  fatisfaftory  caufe  to  believe  that  Mr, 
Burr  had  cordially  received  the  negociator  and  enter 
ed  into  his  views. 

That  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr.  Linn  were  convinced  Vhr. 
Burr  had  negociated  with  a  federal  gentleman,  will  be 
{till  more  apparent  when  we  ftate  who  that  gentleman 
is.  We  then  declare  that  the  FEDERAL  GENTLEMAN 
WHO  NEGOCIATED  WITH  MR.  BURR,  and  who  was  au 
thorized  to  do  fo  by  leading  federal  members  of  Con- 
grefs,  then  aflembled  at  Washington,  is  DAVID  A. 
OGDEN,  Efquire,  COUNSELLOR  AT  LAW.  Mr.  OG- 
DEN  refides  in  this  city,  and  is  profeflionally  connect 
ed  with  General  Hamilton  ;  we  belive  they  are  co 
partners.  They,  however,  both  tranfaft  profeflional 
bufmefs  in  one  office.  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr.  Linn  arc 
known  to  be  intimate  with  Mr.  Ogden  and  General  Ha 
milton.  Hence  when  the  two  Reverend  gentlemen 
ftated  to  Mr.  Burr  that  their  information  was  not  de 
rived  from  common  report,  the  allufion  muft  to  him  have 
been  very  obvious,  and  the  fource  of  their  information, 
though  never  that  we  know  of  by  them  mentioned,  will 
not  appear  to  the  public  lefs  fo. 

More  than  eight  months  ago  we  knew  that  Mr.  Ogdea 
was  the  negotiator,  and  it  is  now  ftated  as  an  undeniable 
truth. 


(     49     ) 

There  is  reafon  to  believe  that  the  ncgcciat'wn  with  Mr. 
Burr  was  firit  planned  in    this  city.     This   is,  however, 
merely  a  furmife,    not  very  material  in  itfelf,  but  proper  to 
be  mentioned.  On  the  i6th  day  of  December  1800,  we  re^ 
ceived  information    that  the    electors    of  South  Carolina 
were  chofen.From  that  day  the  fuccefs  of  Mr.  Jefferfon 
and  Mr.  Burr  was   no  longer  doubted  by  either  party. 
The  laft  refource  of  the  federal  party  was  to  effecl:  the 
election  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the  Prefidency.     Means  were  im 
mediately  devifed,  and  we  think  in  this  city,  to  accomplifh 
that   object.     On  the  27th  day  of  December,  eleven  days 
only  after  the  South-Carolina  news  was  received,  Mr.  Da 
vid  A.  Ogden  engaged  a  feat  in  the  mail  ftage  for  Phila 
delphia.    It  is  probable  that  previous  to  his  going  to  Phila 
delphia,  he  conferred  with  Mr.  Burr  on  the  fubjec~t  of  ef 
fecting  his  election  to  the  Prefidency  by  the  efforts  of  the 
federal  party,  and  that  he  went  to  Wafhington  to  confult 
with  the  leading   federal  members   of  Congrefs   on   the 
fcheme.     It  is  believed  that  Mr.  Ogden  had  no  profef- 
fional  bufmefs  to  tranfacl  at  Wafhington,  and  it  is  there 
fore  difficult  to  conjecture  what  induced  him,  at  that  bleak 
feafon  of  the  year,  to  vifit  the  feat  of  government,  unlefs 
to  confult  with  the  federal  members  of  Congrefs   on  the 
project:  to  negociate  with  Mr.  Burr  the  terms  of  his  elec 
tion  to  the  Prefidency.     It  is    probable   that  Mr.  Ogden 
went  to  Wafhington  exprefsly  for  that  purpofe,  and  that  hs 
previoufly  conferred  with  Mr.  Burr  on  the  defign. 

We  have  dated  that  Mr.   Ogden  left  this  city  in  the 
mail  ftage  for  Philadelphia  on  the  ayth  day  of  December. 

G 


LC  following  certificate,  which  proves  that  Mr.  Burr 
and  himfelf  rode  together  in  the  fame  mail-flage^  eftablimes 
the  fad  : 

'<  New-York,  Saturday,  27th  December, 
1800,  one  o'clock. 

Mail  Stage. 

Mr.  Ogden,    i  feat  to  Philadelphia,  .£300 

Col.  Burr,  2  feats  to  Princeton,  3    15     o 

I  certify  that  the  above  is  a  true  copy  from  the  Stage- 
Books.  MATTHIAS  C.  LYON." 

Mr.  Burr  and  Mr.  Ogden  might  have  ridden  together 
in  the  mail  without  preconcert  ;  whether  they  did  fo  or 
not  every  reader  y/ill  judge  for  himfelf.  To  us  this  fim- 
ple  acl:  fpeaks  a  pertinent  and  eloquent  language  :  it  in 
dicates  much. 

Mr.  Ogden  did  not  remain  long  at  Wamington. — 
"While  there,  h*  was  authorized  by  leaders  of  the  fe 
deral  party  to  negociate  with  Mr.  Burr  the  terms  on 
which  they  propofed  to  elecl;  him  Prefident  of  the  United 
States.  Thus  commiflioned,  Mr.  Ogden  returned  to  this 
city  early  in  January,  j  80 1,  had  an  interview  with  Mr. 
Burr  and  fubmitted  to  him  proportions  which  fhall  by 
and  by  be  explained.  To  thefe  Mr.  Burr  aflented. 


Immediately  after  Mr.  Ogden's  interview  with  Mr. 
Burr,  a  letter  was  written  by  a  leading  federalift  in  this  city, 
to  an  influential  member  of  Congrefs  at  Wamington,  giv 
ing  a  full  and  accurate  detail  of  the  negotiation.  The 


(     5'     ) 

following  letter,  addrefled  to  a  gentleman  in  this  city,  and 
written  at  Wafhington  at  the  time,  fully  explains  the  0112 
penned  by  the  leading  federa  -ifl  juft  mentioned. 

"  Wajbington%  i$th  January,  1801. 
"  It  is  not  true  that  there  is  an  inequality  in  the  votes 
«  of  South-Carolina  favorable  to  Mr.  Jefferfon,  and  the 
«  Union,  I  fear,  will  have  deep  caufe  to  lament  it. — The 
•«  profpetts  are  far  lefs  bright  and  decifive  than  could  be 
"  wifhed,  which  makes  it  more  interefting  that  the  real 
"  friends  of  Mr.  Jefferfon's  election  fliould  be  watchful 
"  againft  the  intrigues  which  are  in  train  for  the  .purpofe 
«  of  defeating  it." 

"  The  following  information  comes  through  dif- 
Cs  ferent  channels  in  which  implicit  confidence  may  be 
"placed."  - 

"  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  of  your  city,  when  not  long 
*f  fince  at  Washington,  was  authorifed  by  fome  leading 
"  men  on  the  federal  fide  in  Congrefs,  to  have  a  confer- 
<c  ence  with  Col.  Burr  for  the  purpofe  of  ascertaining  two 
"  things  ;  firft,  what  would  be  the  conduct  he  \\-ould 
"  obferve  if  elected  by  the  means  of  the  federalifts,  in  re- 
"  fpecl:  to  certain  cardinal  points  of  federal  policy  ?  Se- 
«  cond,  what  co-operation  and  aid  he  could  and  would 
"  afford  towards  procuring  fuccefs  to  his  own  election,  if 
«  the  attempt  (hould  be  made." 

"  Mr.  Ogden,  having  made  a  communication  accord- 
<c  ingly  to  Col.  Burr,  was  anfwered  by  him  in  fubflance, 
"  that  as  to  the  firft  point  it  would  not  be  proper  or  ex- 


(    s*    ) 

t(  pedient  to  enter  into  explanation.  That  as  to  the  fecond 
*'  point,  the  federalifts  might  be  aflured  that  New-York 
"  and  Tenneffee  on  a  fecond  ballot  would  vote  for  him, 
"  and  that  probably  Ncw-Jerfey  and  one  of  the  fouthern 
**  ftates  might  be  induced  to  do  the  fame." 

"  In  a  fubfequent  conference,  he  referred  to  a  gentle- 
«'  man  who  he  faid  would  be  entrufted  to  fpeak  more  par- 
"  ticularly,  and  was  to  be  his  confidential  friend  at  the  feat 
"  of  government." 

"  The  material  points  of  this  negociation,  though  net 
c<  with  all  the  particulars  mentioned  above,  have  been  com- 
t(  municated  in  a  letter  from  a  high  federal  character  in  your 
"  city,  and  one  who  has  long  had  a  predominant  controul 
<f  in  his  party,  to  an  influential  member  of  Congrefs." 

"  Thus  is  the  well  known  wim  of  the  people  bartered 
*'  to  promote  individual  intereft,  and  a  man  elevated  to 
"  the  great  office  of  ftate  who  has  been  raifed  into  notice 
*<  by  the  well  earned  popularity  of  him  he  would  fup- 
"  plant/' 

«c  This  comes  to  me  in  a  fliape  which  renders  any  com- 
cc  munication  of  it  embarraffing  in  the  extreme,  and  re- 
*'  quires  particularly  that  the  name  of  the  negociator 
"  fliould  be  kept  a  profound  fecret ;  but  it  appeared  to 
"  me  efTential  that  you  mould  be  apprifed  of  it  the  better 
"  to  enable  you  to  obferve  the  future  motion  of  the  par- 
"  ties." 

"  Means  of  a  very  prompt  and  imperative  nature  mutt 
"  be  adopted  to  counteract  the  fchcme.  Ton  ma$  remotely 


Sf  f/mt  the  poffibility  of  fome  overtures  from  the  profligacy 
*c  and  defperation  of  the  party." 

"  Your  delegation  mould  be  urged  from  different  quar- 
"  ters  to  remain  firm,  regardiefs  of  temporary  appearances 
"  or  the  opinions  of  wavering  or  timid  minds.  The  fede- 
<«  ralifts  difcover  a  concert  flrongly  indicative  of  fome  im- 
"  portant  object." 

By  adverting  to  the  date  it  will  be  feen  that  the  above 
letter  was  written  immediately  after  Mr.  Ogden's  negocia- 
tion  with  Mr.  Burr,  and  a  letter  had  been  received- at 
Wafhington  from  a  leading  federal  character  in  this  city- 
detailing  the  terms  of  that  negochtion.  It  will  alfo  be 
feen  that  the  letter  is  of  an  highly  confidential  nature,  and 
that  confiderations  of  peculiar  delicacy  prevented  its 
being  made  public.  Nothing  but  the  importance 
of  the  fubje&,  and  the  bold,  unblufhing  denial  of 
the  negociation  by  Mr.  Burr,  could  have  induced  the  gen 
tleman  who  wrote  it  to  permit  its  publication.  Nor 
was  his  confent  to  give  it  publicly  obtained  until  a 
letter  was  written  to  him  by  a  friend  of  ours  for  that  pur- 
pofe,  to  which  the  following  is  an  anfwer. 

«  5th  October,  iSoz. 
«  DEAR  SIR, 

"  I  was  abfent  on  a  vifit  and  did  not  return  'till  this 
«  morning  after  the  mail  had  clofed.  I  perceive  the  im- 
a  portance  of  the  requeft  which  is  made  of  you,  but  I  am 
"  under  reftraints  of  peculiar  delicacy." 


(     54     ) 

""  Our  intelligent  friends  would  I  think  be  fatisfied  with 
«  my  permitting  the  fubjlance  of  my  confidential  commu- 
<{  nication  to  you  to  be  made  known.  The  critical  cir- 
**  cumftances  under  which  I  gave  it  to  you,  have  juftified 
tf  me  to  myfelf.  To  give  the  exact  terms  of  my  letter, 
«£  may  involve  me  in  very  ferious  perfonal  inconveniences  ; 
<c  but  if  you  have  reafon  to  expecl:  collufion  between  Burr 
"  and  Ogden,  and  that  engagements  of  fecrecy  have  been 
"  made  by  others,  you  had  then  better  authorife  a  literal 
"  publication,  and  in  cafe  Ogden  denies  the  fads  dated 
"  therein,  you  are  authorifed  from  me  to  give  the  name  of 
"  ,  as  the  high  federal  character  I  alluded  to,  as  the 

"  writer  of  the  letter  to  Wafhington,  and  on  which  mine 
"  was  predicated.  I  made  a  memorandum  at  the  time. 
'<  I  thought  I  had  taken  the  date,  but  I  well  recollecl: 
"  it  was  in  January.  If  Ogden  mould  prevaricate  and 
<f  this  become  neceflary,  it  would  conform  with  my  wifhes 
**  that  you  fignify  to  my  name." 

«  I  am  ably  fully  to  eftablifh  the  fa<3.  I  can  hardly 
<f  think  he  will  lend  his  weight  of  reputation  to  counte- 
f<  nance  fuch  extreme  profligacy.  But  we  ought  to  fup- 
*'  pofe  nothing  impoffible  when  we  confider  the  flrong 
*'  motives  of  party  policy  which  may  exift  for  difguifmg 
"  the  tranfaction." 

The  public  will  now  be  anxious  to  know  the  name  of 
the  "  high  federal  charaEler"  who  wrote  the  letter  from  this 
city,  to  an  influential  member  of  Congrefs,  detailing  the 
negociation.  That  name  is  ftill  a  myflery.  It  is  eminent 
ly  due  to  the  gentleman  to  whom  the  two  letters  above 


(    55     ) 

were  addrefTed,  and  who  has  kindly  put  copies  of  them 
in   our   poflefiion,  to  fay  that  he  has  not  communicated 
to  us  the  name  of  the  "  high  federal  character."     Yet  we 
are  in  pofleflion  of  a  variety  of  fa&s,  derived  from  a  mul 
tiplicity  of  correct  fources,  which  do  more  than  enable  us 
to  conjecture^  with  confiderable  accuracy,  the  name  of  the 
"  high  federal  character."    We  therefore  ftate  it  as  our  de 
cided  opinion,  and  on  which  we  think  the  public  may  with 
fafety  rely,  that  GENERAL  HAMILTON  is  that  "  high  fede 
ral  character."     His  connection  with  Mr.  Ogden,  the  ne- 
gociator,  is  known  to  be  of  the  moil  intimate  and  endear 
ing  kind.     His   knowledge  cf  the  negociation   will  not 
therefore  be  doubted.     He  is  alfo  known  as  having  long 
held  "  predominant  controul"  in  the  federal   party. — The 
actual  influence  of  General  Hamilton  in   that  party  corre- 
fponds  precifely  with  the  defcription  given  in  the  two  let 
ters.     Befides,  there  are  other  corroborating  circumftancefe 
which  irrefiftibly  impofe  upon  us  the   belief  that  General 
Hamilton  is  the  "  high  federal  character"  defcribed.     We 
will  mention  a  powerful  one.     During  the  fitting  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  this  ftate  at  Albany,   in   the   winter  of 
1 80 1.     Jofiah  Ogden  Hoffman,   Efq.    General  Hamilton, 
Judge  Troup,  Judge  B.  Livingfton,  and  Judge  Pendleton, 
all  of  the  city  of  New-York,  dined  together  at  the  Hotel. 

After  dinner  General  Hamilton  declared,  openly,  that 
Mr.  Burr,  had  intrigued  with  a  federal  gentleman  to  effect 
his  election  to  the  Prefidency.  When  fpoken  to  on  the 
boldnefs  of  the  declaration,  General  Hamilton  added  that 
he  could  prove  it,  or  it  could  bzprwed  in  a  court  ofjitftict! 


(     56     ) 

The  negociation  was  there   made  no  fecrct  of:  General 
Hamilton  made  the  declaration  aloud  and  without  referve. 

There  are  other  facls  in  our  poffeflion  which  authorize 
us  to  Hate,  unequivocally ,  that  GENERAL  HAMILTON  is  the 
"  high  federal  character"  alluded  to  in  the  two  letters.  If 
he  is  not,  he  will  deny  ifpublicly\  if  he  is,  he  has  too  much 
honor  and  integrity  to  difavow  an  a£  of  his  own : 

If  thefe  fads  (land  in  need  of  corroboration,  there  are 
concurring  circumftances  in  abundance  which  ftrongiy 
indicate  the  exiflence  of  the  plot.  The  letter  dat^d  Waih- 
ington,  apth  January,  1801,  dates  that  Mr.  Burr  obferved, 
in  reply  to  the  fecond  proportion  of  the  negociator,  to  wit, 
<c  what  co-operation  and  aid  he  could  and  would  afford  to* 
wards  procuring  fuccefs  to  his  own  election  ?"  that  <c  the 
federalifts  might  be  allured  that  New-York  and  Tenncflee 
on  a  fecond  ballot  would  vote  for  him,  and  that  probably 
New-Jerfey  and  one  of  the  fouthern  dates  might  be  in 
duced  to  do  the  fame."  Such  was  the  anfwer  of  Mr.  Burr 
to  the  fecond  propofition  of  the  negotiator. 

The  negociation  was  commenced  in  the  city  of  New- 
York  about  the  1 5th  of  January,  iSoi.  The  letter  of 
General  Hamilton  to  a  leading  federal  member  of  Congrefs 
detailing  the  negociation,  was  written  about  the  2oth  of 
the  fame  month.  That  which  gives  the  fubilance  of  Gen- 
neral  Hamilton's  letter,  is  dated  Wafhington,  January  29, 
1 80 1.  The  negociation  was  complete  before  January  2oth. 
On  or  about  the  24th  of  January,  Mr. Burr  left  this  city 
for  Albany  to  take  his  feat  in  the  (late  aflfembly  The  fame 
day  or  the  day  after,  Mr.  William  P.  Van  Nefs,  who  was 


(    57    ) 

not  a  member  of  the  Legiflature,  followed  him  to  Al 
bany.  On  the  arrival  of  Mr.  Burr,  enquiries  were  made 
pf  him  touching  the  Prefidential  election.  To  every  quef* 
tion  he  anfwered,  with  the  utmofl  confidence  and  cheer- 
fulnefs,  that  Mr.  JefFerfon  would  certainly  be  elected,  and 
that  no  oppofition  could  or  would  be  made  in  the  Houfe 
of  Reprefentatives.  He  uniformly  treated  the  idea  of  ma 
terial  oppofition  in  the  Houfe  as  extravagant  and  chimeri 
cal.  This  was  precifely  the  conduct  of  Mr.  Burr  at  Al 
bany.  And  yet  he  knew  that  he  had  negociated  with  Mr. 
Ogden  to  effect  his  own  election  to  the  Prefidency,  and 
that  in  confequence  of  that  negociation  every  effort  within, 
the  compafs  of  the  federal  party  would  be  employed  to  ac- 
complifli  it.  This  conduct  of  Mr.  Burr  at  Albany,  was 
fuch  as  every  confummate  and  unprincipled  intriguer 
would  adopt.  It  was  a  matter  of  importance  to  him  to 
prevent  the  tranlmiffion  of  letters  from  Albany  to  Walh- 
ington  urging  firmnefs  and  perfeverance  in  our  Reprefen 
tatives  in  favour  of  Mr.  Jefterfon's  election  j  and  Mr.  Burr 
vainly  imagined  his  placid  deportment  calculated  to  com 
pafs  that  object  by  allaying  reafonable  fears  and  compof- 
ing  alarming  apprehenfion.  His  intrigues  were,  however, 
perceived  by  a  few  individuals  at  Albany,  and  his  reprefen-. 
tations  were  therefore  little  heeded, 

Let  us  now  view  the  conduct  of  his  confidential 
friend  Mr.  William  P.  Van  Nefa,  of  this  city,  who  accom 
panied  Mr.  Burr  to  Albany.  Thofe  who  have  read  the 
"  Narrative"  will  perceive  that  this  is  the  fame  gentleman 
who  negociated  for  Mr.  Burr  the  fuppreffion  of  the 
ry  of  the  Administration  of  Mr.  John  Adams. 


(     $8     } 

While  Mr.  Burr  was  openly  declaring  at  Albany 
that  there  was  no  foundation  for  apprehenfion  con 
cerning  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  Mr.  William 
P.  Van  Nefs,  obferved,  in  fe:ret>  a  conduct  the  re- 
vtrfe.  He  was  unremittingly  employed  in  furthering 
the  negociation  of  Mr.  Burr  arid  Mr.  Ogden.  While  at 
Kinderhook,  he  wrote  a  letter  to  our  Reprefentative, 
Mr.  Edward  Livingfton,  then  at  Walhington,  repre- 
fenting  it  as  the  the  fenfe  of  the  republicans  of  this  Jlate> 
that,  after  the  frft  or  feccnd  vote  in  the  houfe  Mr.  Jtffer* 
fon  Jhould  be  given  up  ! !  This  correfponds  with  Mr. 
Burr's  reply  to  the  fecond  proportion  of  Mr.  Ogden,  the 
negociator,  namely,  that  "  on  a  fecond  ballot,  New- York 
would  vote  for  him  I"  We  do  not  affert  on  vague  report 
that  Mr.  Van  Nefs  wrote  the  letter  to  Mr.  Livingfton  ;  it 
is  dated  as  an  undeniable  faff,  one  which,  if  not  true,  is 
eafy  of  refutation.  The  name  of  Mr.  Van  Nefs  the 
writer,  and  of  Mr.  Livingfton  the  receiver  of  the  letter^ 
are  mentioned  •,  and  both  live  in  this  city. 

Mr.  Burr  alfo  replied  to  the  fecond  proposition  of  Mr. 
Ogden,  that,  "  on  a  fecond  ballot  New-Jerfey  might  be 
induced  to  vote  for  him."  What  covert  meafures  Mr. 
Burr  had  taken  to  effect  this,  is  not  known  ;  but  it  is  cer 
tain  that  Mr.  Van  Nefs  wrote  a  letter  to  an  influential 
republican  who  refides  at  Poughkeepfie,  urging  him  in 
ftrong  terms  to  procure  letters  from  New-Jerfey,  advif- 
ingthe  New-Jerfey  republican  members  in  Congrefs  to 
drop  Mr.  Jefferfon  on  the  fecond  ballot  in  the  houfe  ! 

Such  were  the  proceedings  of  Mr.  Burr  and  his  confi 
dential  friend  Mr.  Van  Nefs  at  Albany,  proceedings  which 


(    59    ) 

«xa£Uy  accord  with  the  terms  of  the  negotiation  conclud 
ed  between  .Mr.  Burr  and  Mr.  Ogden. 

Nor  were  the  confidential  friends  of  Vrr.  Burr  either 
filent  or  inactive  in  this  city.  Mr.  Matliew  L.  Davis,  one  of 
the  depsfitories  of  the  ftcrets  of  Mr.  Burr,  and  on  this  ac 
count  only  deferving  of  notice,  ran  about  from  Republican 
to  Republican  during  the  balloting  in  the  houfe,  declaring 
that  the  Republicans  in  Con  grefs  a&ed  very  improperly 
in  not  giving  up  Mr.  Jefferfon,  avering  that  they  muft  e- 
ventually  abandon  him,  that  perfevering  oppofition  would 
injure  the  feelings  of  Mr.  Burr,  and  that  no  one  could  fore- 
fee  the  conffquenc.es  of  fuch  ftubborn  conduct  if  Mr.  Burr 
ihould  at  length  be  elected !  It  is  probable  that  Mr.  Davis 
at  that  time  was  apprifed  of  the  negociation  between  Mr. 
Burr  and  Mr.  Ogden. 

Our  wonder  at  the  pertinacity  of  the  federalifts  in  thf 
Houfe  of  Reprefentatives  will  henceforward  ceafe.  The 
caufe  of  it  may  now  be  clearly  perceived.  That  oppofi* 
tion  to  Mr.  Jefferfon  in  the  houfe,  which  alarmed  the 
country  and  brought  it  to  the  brink  of  civil  war,  \NA§ founded 
on  the  negociation  concluded  between  Mr.  Burr  and  Mr, 
Ogden.  Six  and  thirty  times  *was  tJye  tranquillity  of  the 
country  endangered  to  elevate  an  intriguer  to  office  contrary  to 
the  known  ivill  of  a  majority  of  the  people.  Americans  / 
You  have  infinite  caufe  to  be  thankful  that  the  plot  is  dif- 
covered. 

The  federalifts  in  the  houfe  of  reprefentatives  relied  on 
the  declaration  of  Mr.  Burr  to  Mr.  Ogden  that  «'  on  the 
fecond  ballot  New-York  and  New-  Terfey  would  vote  for 
him.5*  Hence  at  every  ballot,  they  flocked  round  the  bal 
lot  boxes  of  thefe  two  ftates,  and  with  extreme  folkitudc 


"enquired  how  the  votes  flood  ?  They  were  particularly 
attentive  to  the  ballot  box  of  New- York  ;  for  it  was  very 
reafonably  fuppofed  that  if  the  ftate  of  New-York  gave 
way,  others  would  follow  the  example.  On  the  fecond 
ballot,  however,  this  ftate  as  well  as  New-Jerfey  was  found 
faithful  Still  were  the  federalifts  in  hopes,  placing  much 
confidence  in  the  promifes  and  machinations  of  Mr.  Burr. 
Finding  that  they  were  twice  difappointed,  they  yet  per- 
fevered,  deeming  it  probable  that  the  Republican  reprefent- 
atives,  on  whofe  infidelity  Mr.  Burr  had  made  his  calcula 
tions,  intended  only  to  exhibit  a  (hew  of  firmnefs  previous 
to  an  unqualified  furrender.  In  this  vain  hope  (but  one 
though,  by  the  by,  not  entirely  without  foundation)  they 
continued  to  vote  until  it  was  found,  from  whatever  caufey 
that  no  impreffion  could  be  made  on  thofe  republican  mem 
bers  on  whofe  unfaitlfulnefs  Mr.  Burr  had  predicated  all 
his  expectations.  The  conteft  was  then,  and  not  till  then, 
abandoned  by  the  federalifts. 

\Ve  come  now  to  notice  the  propofitions  fubmitted  by 
Mr.  Ogden  to  Mr.  Burr  and  his  anfwers  thereto.  On  the 
corre&nefs  of  thefe  propofitions  and  anfwers  the  public 
may  implicitly  rely  ;  and  fhould  they  be  contradicted, 
either  by  General  Hamilton,  whom  we  fay  is  the  writer 
of  the  letter  from  this  city  to  a  leading  member  of  Con- 
grefs  at  Wamington,  or  by  Mr.  Ogden,  the  negociator, 
the  reader  will  perceive  that  the  gentleman,  who  has  done 
the  country  fo  much  fervice  in  communicating  thofe  pro 
pofitions  and  anfwers,  {lands  pledged  virtually  to  "  prove 
the  facts."  We  are  perfuaded,  however,  that  neither  the 
•ne  nor  the  other  can  or  will  be  done\ 


The  firft  propofition  of  Mr.  Ogden  to  Mn  Burr  is  this : 
*<  What  would  be  the  conduct  he  would  obferve,  if  ele&ed 
w  by  the  means  of  the  federalifts,  in  refpetl  to  certain  car- 
«  d'mal  points  si  federal  policy  ?"  To  which  Mr.  Burr  made 
the  following  reply  ;  "  As  to  the  firft  point  it  would  not 
"  be  proper  or  expedient  to  enter  into  explanation — that 
"  the  federalifts  muft  rely  upon  the  fituation  in  which  he 
"  would  be  placed  if  raifed  to  the  Prefidency  by  their 
"  votes  in  oppofition  to  the  adverfe  party." 

This  anfwer  is  as  full  and  fatisfa&ory,  for  aj7>y?  inter~ 
•view,  as  could  poffibly  have  been  expected.  Mr.  Burr, 
aware  of  his  peculiar  fituation,  fays — but  in  fuch  a  manner 
as  not  in  the  leaft  to  indicate  a  repulfe — that  it  would  "not 
be  proper  or  expedient  to  enter  into  explanation." — That  is 
.  to  fay,  into  minute  detail ;  and  that  fuch '<  explanation,''  or 
minutenefs,wouldnotbe  "  expedient"  for  two  reafons,  firft, 
becaufe  of  the  delicacy  of  his  fituation,  and  fecond,  that  fo 
far  as  it  was  proper  to  fatisfy  the  federalifts  as  to  <'  certain 
cardinal  points  of  federal  policy"  general  remarks  in  that 
Jlage  of  the  negotiation  would  be  fufficient.  He  then  makes 
thefe  general  remarks,  and  fays  "  the  federalifts  muft  rely 
upon  the  fituation  in  which  he  fhould  be  placed  if  raifed 
to  the  Prefidency  in  oppofition  to  the  adverfe  party/' 
Here  Mr.  Burr  is  too  explicit  to  be  mifanderftood.  If 
raifed  to  the  Prefidency  by  the  federalifts,  he  fhould  owe 
his  election  to  them,  and  confequently  that  the  cardinal 
points  of  his  adminiftration  fhould  accord  with  federal  po~ 
licy.  This  is  a  plain  and  fair  interpretation  of  Mr.  Burr's 
reply  to  the  firft  propofition,  which  is  ftronger,  and  con 
cedes  more  to  Mr.  Ogden,  than  could  well  have  been  ex 
pected  on  a  firft  interview. 


(     62     ) 

15ut  a  fecond conference  was  had  with  Mr.  Ogden  in 
which  Mr.  Burr  «  referred  to  a  gentleman  who  he  faid 
would  be  intruded  to  fpeak  more  particularly,  and  who 
was  to  be  his  confidential  friend  at  the  feat  of  government. 
«'  This  confidential  friend  was  intrufted"  by  Mr.  Burr  to 
complete  the  details  of  the  general  principles  of  the  ncgocia- 
iion,  to  which  Mr.  Burr  had  previoufly  and  fully  afTented. 

Mr.  Burr's  reply  to  dizfeco^  proportion  of  Mr.  Ogden 
clearly  elucidates  the  meaning- — if  any  elucidatton  be  ne- 
ceflary — of  his  anfwer  to  the  firft.     The  firft  propofition 
is  in  thefe  terms.     "  What  co-operation  and  aid  he  could 
and  would  afford   towards  procuring  fuccefs  to  his  own 
election  if  the  attempt  fliould  be  made  ?"     To  which  A'Ir. 
Burr  replied  "  The  Federalifts  might  beaffured  that  New- 
York  and  Tennefiee  on  a  fecond  ballot   would   vote  for 
him,  and  that  probably  New-Jerfey  and  one  of  the  fouthern 
ftates  might  be  induced  to  do  the  fame."     In  this  reply  is 
contained  not  only  his  aflent  to  be  held  up  by  the  federal- 
ifts  in  oppofition  to  Mr.  Jefferfon,  but  a  pofitivc  aflertion, 
alike  confoling  to  himfelf  and  to  the  federal  negociator, 
that,  '«  on  a  fecond  ballot  New-York  and  Tennefiee  would 
vote  for  himfelf,  and  probably  New-Jerfey  and  a  fouthern 
flate  might  be  induced  to  do  the   fame."    What   is  this 
but    entering  fully  into   the   views    of  the   federal  ne 
gociator,    and  holding    out    to    him  the  mod  alluring 
temptations  to  oppofe  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  and 
promifing  him  indeed,  in  the  event,  the  completed  fuccefs  ? 
^ray,  does  not  Mr.  Burr's  reply  import  that  he  meant  to 
ufe  the  moft  refined  arts  of  fedu£Uon  to  effecl:  his  pur- 
pofes  ?    He  fays  ''  that  probably  New-Jerfey  and  a  fouth- 


crn  ftate  might  be  induced  to  do  the  fame."  The  word 
"  induced"  is  uncommonly  pertinent,  and  has  a  peculiar  fig- 
nification  when  uttered  by  a  man  negociating  with  an  an- 
tagonift  to  betray  his  caufe  !  How  were  the  two  ftates 
to  be  induced  to  vote  for  Mr.  Burr  ?  Certainly  not  by  the 
conflituents  of  thofe  reprefentatives  who  were  believed  to 
be  ardent  for  the  ele&ion  of  Mr.  Jefferfon.  For  we  wit- 
neffed  an  enthufiafm  among  the  republicans  at  that  period 
ready  to  unmeath  the  fword,  if  neceffity  required,  in  fa 
vour  of  his  election.  No,  the  inducement  was  to  be  of 
that  peculiar  kind  which  belongs  exclufively  to  Mr.  J5urr  j 
it  was  to  employ  undue  means  to  allure  the  reprefenta 
tives  of  the  country  from  a  difcharge  of  their  duty. 

But  how  came  Mr.  Burr  to  be  fo   certain  that  NEW- 
YORK  would,  on  a  fecond  ballot,  vote  for  himfelf  ?  Had 
THIS  ftate  manifefted  a  preference  for  Mr.  Burr  ?  Certain 
ly  not.     The  ftate  of  New-York  would  have  been  among 
the  loft  in  the  union  to  have  made  choice  of  Mr.  Burr  in 
preference  to  Mr.  Jefferfon.     And  fo  confcious  was  Mr. 
Burr  himfelf  of  the  predilection  of  this  ftate  for  Mr.  JefFer  ] 
fon,  that  the  refiftlefs  current  of  public  opinion  compelled 
him  to  manifeft  an  affiimed  exterior,  indicative  of  affect 
ion  for  Mr.  Jefferfon,  at  the  very  moment  he  was  fecretfy 
negociating  with  Mr.  Ogden  to  fupplant  him.     But  we  arc 
treating  on  delicate  ground.     We  draw  the  curtain  over  a 
•tranfa&ion  on  which  we  cannot  dwell  with  fafety,  not  to 
Mr.  Burr,  but  to  others. 

How  then  ftands  the  account  ?  Firft,  that  Mr.  Burr  ne- 
gociated,  as  dated  in  the  "  View  of  his  political  condudY* 
with  a  federal  gentleman  to  effect  his  election  to  the  Prefi- 
dency.  Second,  that  Mr.  DAVID  A.  OCDEN  of  this  city 


(     64     ) 

was  the  negotiator.  If  it  be  faid  that  becaufe  Mr.  Ogdea 
has  not  certified  this  himfelf  it  will  not  be  believed  ;  we  an- 
fwer  that  it  cannot  be  expected  that  he  would  do  fo,  for 
two  reafons,  firft,  becaufe  his  own  connection  with  Mr. 
Burr  in  the  novel  tranfa6Uon  would  neceflarily  forbid  it  \ 
and  fecond,  fince  his  doing  fo  would  at  once  heal  that  de- 
vifion  from  which  the  federalifts  expect  to  profit.  But  it 
is  neverthelefs  as  true  that  Mr.  Ogden  did  negotiate  with  Mr. 
Burr,  as  if  he  had  made  an  affidavit  of  the  negociation ; 
and  mould  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  publicly  deny  it,  a  thing 
by  no  means  expected,  his  denialy£tf //  be  difproved  by  tefli- 
inony  that  will  filence  even  calumny  itfelf  and  impofe  con 
viction  on  the  moft  incredulous  and  incorrigible  Burrite, 

Third,  Mr.  Ogden  went  from  this  city  to  Wafhing- 
ton  to  confult  with  the  leaders  of  the  federal  party,  at 
the  feat  of  government,  on  the  27th  of  December  1 800. — 
Mr.  Burr  and  himfelf  rode  together  in  the  mail  ftage.  Mr. 
Ogden  was  authorifed  at  Wafhington  to  negociate  with 
^ir.  Burr  the  terms  on  which  the  federal  party  propof- 
ed  to  elecl:  him  to  the  Prefidency.  Mr.  Ogden  returned 
with  great  expedition.  About  the  I5th  January  1801, 
Mr.  Ogden  completed  his  negociation  with  Mr.  Burr. 
The  connection  between  Mr.  Ogden  and  General  Ha 
milton  is  fo  well  known  in  this  city,  as  to  warrant  the 
aflertion  that  the  one  could  hardly  be  poflefled  of  a 
political  fecret  without  communicating  it  to  the 
other.  It  will  be  believed,  as  highly  probable,  that  Mr* 
Ogden  informed  General  Hamilton  of  the  negociation. 
About  the  ^oth  of  January,  <we  fay  that  General  Hamilt 
ton  wrote  the  letter  on  which  the  one  herein  inferted  is 


(     65     ) 

predicated,  and  which  is  dated  "  Washington,  January  29 
1801."  This  letter,  which  we  ascribe  to  General  Hamil 
ton,  details  the  negociation,  the  propositions  submitted  to, 
and  the  answers  of,  Mr.  Burr.  If  General  Hamilton  is  not 
the  writer  of  that  letter,  if  he  is  not  that  "  HIGH  FEDERAL 
CHARACTER"  who  has  long  held  "  predominant  controul" 
in  the  federal  party,  he  will  of  course  deny  it.  But  ive  are 
persuaded  he  cannot.  If,  however,  he  should  disavow 
having  written  a  letter  of  that  nature,  a  thing  not  antici 
pated,  then  will  the  writer's  name  be  divulged  by  the  gen 
tleman  who  communicated  the  letter  from  Washington  giv 
ing  an  account  of  the  negociation,  and  that  negociation  be 
as  completely  brought  home  to  Mr.  Ogden  as  if  the  letter 
which  we  ascribe  to  General  Hamilton  had  been  written  by 
him, 

Fourth.     It  appears  that  Mr.  Burr,  on  the  first  interview 
With  Mr.  Ogden,  entered  fully  and  cordially  into  his  views 
and  assented  to  his  propositions:  and  that  accordingly, 
\vhile  he  himself  affected  to  disguise  his  own  projects  at  Al 
bany,  his  confidential  friend,  Mr.  Van  Ness,  was  writing 
letters,  requesting  one  of  our  representatives,  as  the  sense 
of  the  republicans  at  Albany^  to  drop  Mr.   Jefferson  and 
vo  te  for  Mr.  Burr  j   and  that  this  conduct  on  the  part  of  Mr 
Van  Ness  corresponds  with  the   terms  of  Mr.  Burr's  nego 
ciation  with  Mr.  Ogden. 

Such  is  the  state  of  this  deep  laid-plot,  such  the  agents 
who  have  been  active  in  it ;  and  happy  indeed  is  it  for  the 
•ountry  that  it  is  at  length  brought  to  light. 


(     66     ) 

We  have  much  more  to  say :  we  have  still  a  very  power 
ful  corps  de  reserve  of  testimony.  But  as  the  evening  grows 
late,  and  the  developement  must  appear  according  to  pro 
mise,  we  close  for  the  present  with  inviting,  in  the  late  lan 
guage  of  Mr.  Burr  "  AN  UNION  OF  ALL  HONEST, 
MEN"  to  save  the  country. 


LETTER    IX. 

"  The  people  having  referved  to  themfelves  the  choice  of  their 
Reprefentativesi  as  the  fence  to  their  properties,  could  do  it 
lor  no  other  end,  but  that  they  might  always  be  freely  chofeiij 
freely  aft,  and  advife,  as  the  neceffhy  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  the  public  good  fhould  upon  examination  and  mature  de 
bate  be  judged  to  require.  But  when  ihe  arts  of  perverted 
men  are  made  ufe  of  to  deftroy  all  that  ftand  in  the  way  of 
bad  defigns,  and  will  not  comply  and  confent  to  betray  tke 
liberties  of  their  country,  it  will  be  paft  doubt  that  fomething 
is  wrong.  What  power  they  ought  to  have  in  ibciety, 
who  thus  employ  it  contrary  to  the  truil  went  along  with 
it  in  its  firil  inftitution,  is  eafy  to  determine  ;  and  one  cannot 
but  fee  that  he,  who  has  once  attempted  any  fuch  thing  as 
this,  cannbt  any  linger  be  tntfiea." 

LOCKE. 

The  following  letters  are  extracted  jrsm  the  Morning  Chronicle  of 

November  25  : 
SIR, 

Though  I  have  not  the  pleafure  of  a  perfonal  acquaintance 
"with  you,  I  flatter  myself  that  this  Jetter  will  preclude  the  ne- 
ceffity  of  an  apology  for  addreffing  you. 

It  has  been  aflerted  in  various  publications  that  Mr.  Burr, 
during  the  late  election  for  Preiident  aTid  Vice-Preiident,  entered 
into  negociations  and  agreed  to  terms  with  the  federal  party,  or 
with  certain  individuals  of  that  party,  with  a  view  to  advance 
lumfelf  to  the  office  of  Prefident,  to  the  excluilon  of  Mr.  jeffer 
fon,  Mr.  Burr,  in  a  letter  to  Gov.  l>loomfield,dated  the  2 lit  Sept. 


C    67    ) 

hfr,  declared  that  all  fuch  allegations  were  falfe  and  ground- 
lefs ;  and  the  charges  have  been  renewed  in  more  recent  publica* 
tions,  which  point  to  you  by  name,  as  the  perfon  through  whom 
fuch  negociations  were  carried  on  and  terms  concluded.  It  has 
now  bee  me  interefting  to  a  great  portion  of  the  community  to 
be  informed  how  far  thefe  aflertions  and  charges  have  been  au 
thorized  by  you,  or  are  warranted  by  your  knowledge  of  fa<fts. 
Having  received  frequent  anonymous  communications  for  the 
Morning  Chronicle,  relative  to  thefe  matters,  and  being  unwil 
ling  to  occupy  the  paper  with  vague  and  unfubftantiated  con - 
jciftures  or  remarks  on  a  fubje»5t  of  fuch  importance,  I  am  induced 
to  apply  directly  to  yourfelf  as  an  authentic  fource  of  information. 
I  do  this  with  the  more  confidence,  from  a  perfualion  that  you 
can  have  no  wifh  to  fuffer  falfe  reports  to  circulate  under  the  au 
thority  of  your  name,. for  mere  party  ptirpofes  ;  and  that,  in  the  ac 
tual  pofture  of  things,  you  cannot  be  averfe  to  declare  publicly 
and  explicitly  your  agency,  if  any,  in  the  bufinefs.  I  take  the  li 
berty  therefore  of  requeuing  your  written  declaration  to  the  points 
above  ftated,  together  with  any  circumftances  you  may  be 
pleafed  to  communicate,  tending  to  eftablifh  the  truth  or  fallhood 
*  of  the  charges  in  queftion. 

I  have  the  hoaor  to  be, 
Very  refped  fully, 
Your  obed't  ferv't, 

P.  IRVING,, 
''New- York,  Nov.  24,  1802% 
David  A.  Ogden,  efq. 

New- York  t  Nov.  24,  1802. 
SIR, 

Though  I  did  not  conceive  k  to  be  incumbent  upon  me,  or  iri 
itfei'f  proper  to  notice  a  publication  in  a  newfpaper,  in  which  my 
name  was  ufed  without  my  permiffion  or  knowledge,  yet  I  have 
no  objection  to  reply  to  an  enquiry  wh-ich  comes  in  the  fhape  of 
that  contained  in  your  letter,  and  from  a  perfon  of  your  (landing 
in  fociety. 

I  declare  that  my  journey  to  the  city  of  Waftiington,  in  the 
year  1800,  was  purely  on  private  bufinefs,  and  without  any  un- 
derftandingor  concert  whatever  with  Col.  Burr,  whom  I  met  at 
the  ftage-effice  on  his  way  to  Trenton,  not  having  had  before  the 
leaft  intimation  of  fuch  a  meeting;  and  that  I  was  not  then  or 
at  any  time,  charged  by  him  with  any  commiffion  or  errand  of 


(    68     ) 

a  political  nature.  In  the  courfe  of  our  journey  no  political  con- 
verfation  took  place  but  of  a  general  nature,  and  in  the  prefence 
of  the  paffengers. 

When  about  to  return  from  the  city  of  Waftiington,  two  or 
three  members  of  Congrefs,  of  the  federal  party,  fpoke  to  me 
about  their  views  as  to  the  election  of  Prefident,  defiring  me 
to  con verfe  with  Col.  Burr  on  the  fubject,  and  to  af certain  whe 
ther  he  would  enter  into  terms.  On  my  return  to  New-York,  I 
called  on  Col.  Burr  and  communicated  the  above  to  him.  He  ex 
plicitly  declined  the  explanation,  and  did  neither  propofe  nor 
agree  to  any  terms.  I  had  no  other  interview  or  communication 
with  him  on  the  fubjecl:,  and  fo  little  was  I  fatisfied  with  this 
that  in  a  letter  which  I  foon  afterwards  wrote  to  a  member  of 
Congrefs,  and  which  was  the  only  one  I  wrote,  I  diffuaded  from 
giving  iupport  to  Col.  Burr,  and  advifed  rather  to  acquiefce  in 
the  election  of  Mr.  JefFerion,  as  the  lefs  dangerous  man  of  the 
two  to  that  caufe  with  which  I  believed  the  public  intereft  to  be 
infeparably  connected. 

There  are  no  facts  within  my  knowledge  tending  to  eftablifh 
the  truth  of  the  charges  fpecified  in  your  letter. 
With  due  refpeft, 

I  am,  iir,  your  ob't  ferv't, 

DAVID  A.  OGDEN. 

Dr.  P.  Irving. 

Doctor  Irving's  letter  was  written,  as  stated  in  it,  in 
consequence  of  the  accusations  maintained  in  our  eighth 
on  the  subject  of  Mr.  Burr's  machination  to  compass  the 
Presidency  in  opposition  to  the  wishes  and  expectations  of 
the  people,  and  seemingly,  with  a  view  to  ascertain  whe 
ther  or  not  they  were  well  founded  ?  In  that  letter  we  ad 
duced  a  variety  of  proof  in  support  of  the  charges  prefer* 
red  against  the  Vice-President,  which,  although  not  of 
the  most  positive  kind — the  transaction  not  admitting  of 
point  blank  testimony — was  nevertheless  so  circumstan 
tial  and  highly  presumptive  as  to  be  entitled,  without 
weightier  counter-evidence,  to  full  credence.  It  was 


(    69     ) 

stated,  onthe  reluctant  authority  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Abeel 
and  Dr.  Linn,  first,  that  Mr.  Burr  had  negociated 
with  a  federal  gentleman  to  effect  his  election  to  the  Pre 
sidency,  which  remains  wicontradkted.  Secondly,  that 
Mr.  Burr,  anxious  to  avail  himself  of  whatever  would 
contribute  to  his  defence,  solicited,  in  person,  of  the  two 
reverend  gentlemen,  a  certificate  importing  that  the  infor 
mation  they  had  received  of  his  negociation.  was  derived 
from  common  report ;  which  was  refused :  this  has  not 
been  denied. — Thirdly  on  the  same  authority  it  was  af 
firmed  that  Mr.  Burr,  "  assented  to  the  measures  of  the 
negotiator"  This  remains  unimpaired.)  as  in  the  course 
of  our  remarks  we  shall  evince,  notwithstanding  the  refi 
ned  evasions  contained  in  the  letter  of  the  negociator. 

Let  us  for  a  moment  digress  to  attend  to  the  probable 
truth  of  the  important  declaration  of  Mr.  Abeel  and  Dr. 
Linn.     The  intimacy  which  subsists  between  these  cler 
gymen  and  him  who  has  avowed  that  he  was  clothed  by 
leading  federalists  at  Washington  with  powers  to  nego 
tiate  with  Col.  Burr  the  terms  on  which  they  proposed  to 
elect  him  President,    is  here  well  known  to   be  great* 
Dr.  Linn,  in  all  human  probability,  advised  with  Gen. 
Hamilton  before  he  wrote  his  "  Serious  Considerations  :v 
a  work  confessedly  penned  to  prevent  the  election  of  Mr* 
Jefferson  j  and  they  are  known,  even  now,  to  confer  on 
political  subjects.     This  familiar  and  confidential  inter 
course  is  alike  holden  between  General  Hamilton,  the 
negociator,  and  the  two  clergymen.     It  will  probably  bo 


deemed  superfluous  to  repeat  in  this  city  facts  so  notorious, 
but  the  information  may,  nevertheless,  be  useful  in  the 
other  states. 

The  two  clergymen  told  Mr.  Burr,  emphatically,  that 
their  information  of  his  having  negoeiated  with  a  federal 
gentleman  with  a  view  to  his  election  to  the  Presidency, 
was  not  derived  from  common  report.  May  we  then  be 
permitted  to  ask  from  whom  was  it  derived  ?  From  their 
habits  of  intercourse  with  Mr.  Ogden,  is  it  not  highly- 
probable  that  they  received  it  from  him  ? 

How  otherwise  shall  we  account  for  their  conviction 
that  Mr.  Burr  had  negociated  with  Mr.  Ogden  and 
"  assented  to  his  measures  ?"  This  they  have  declared, 
and  take  upon  themselves  the  responsibility  of  the  decla 
ration. 

Shall  we  say  that,  contrary  to  their  assertions,  they 
have  deliberately  propagated  and  adhered  to  a  fact  on  no 
better  foundation  than  light  surmise  ;  or  rather  ought  we 
not  to  conclude  that  their  information  was  correct,  that 
they  received  it  from  Ogden  himself,  and  that  his  stu 
died  evasions  do  not  clash  with  or  impair  their  declara 
tion,  that  Mr.  Burr  "  Assented  to  the  measures  of  the 
negociator  ?" 

The  propriety  of  commenting  on  the  material  assertion, 
will  form  an  adequate  apology  for  his  momentary  depar- 


ture  from  consistent  arrangement.     We  resume  the  enu 
meration  of  the  contents  of  our  last  letter. 


Fourthly.  It  was  stated  that  General  Hamilton  was  the 
"  high  federal  character"  alluded  to  in  the  letter  dated 
V  Washington,  January  29,  1801,"  detailing  the  negocia- 
tion.  This,  however,  was  merely  advanced  as  the  opinion 
of  the  Editors,  who  at  that  time  were  not  authorized  by 
the  writer  of  it  to  point  to  General  Hamilton  by  name  as 
the  person  described.  Fifthly  —  That  in  case  Ogden  deni 
ed  the  facts  contained  therein,  the  name  of  blank  was  to 
be  given  to  the  public  as  ths  u  high  federal  character7* 
alluded  to  by  the  writer.  Sixthly  —  That  "  If  Ogden 
should  prevaricate,  it  would  conform  with  the  wishes  of 
the  writer  that  his  name  be  signified  to  blank"  And 
lastly,  it  was  affirmed  that,  in  accordance  with  Mr.  Burr's 
answer  to  the  second  proposition  of  the  negociator,  to 
wit  :  "  What  aid  he  could  and  would  afford  toward  pro 
curing  success  to  his  own  election  in  case  the  attempt 
should  be  made  by  the  federalists.  "  William  P.  Van 
Ness,  one  of  the  confidential  friends  of  Mr.  Burr,  wrote 
to  Mr.  Edward  Livingston,  our  then  representative,  ad 
vising  him,  as  the  seme  of  the  republicans,  to  relinquish 
Mr.  Jefferson  after  the  first  or  second  ballot  in  the  house, 
and  vote  for  Mr.  Burr  \  This  momentous  fact,  al 
though  the  writer,  Mr.  Van  Ness,  and  the  receiver  of 
the  letter,  Mr.  Livingston,  reside  in  this  city, 
Wicontraditfetl  / 


(     72     ) 

Having  recapitulated  the  heads  of  our  eight  letter  we 
proceed  to  fulfil-our  engagements  with  the  public  ;  but  as 
from  their  attentive  and  artful  phraseology,  the  letters  of 
Dr.  Irving  and  the  negociator  are  calculated  to  deceive, 
we  shall  previously  notice  their  contents,  convinced  that  a 
slight  examination  will  shew  that  Mr.  Ogden's  letter  con 
tradicts  no  one  material  fact  advanced  in  our  last. 

Dr.  Irving  says  "  It  has  been  asserted  in  various  pub 
lications  that  Mr.  Burr,  during  the  late  election  for  Pre 
sident  and  Vice-President,  entered  into  negotiations  AND 
agreed  to  terms  with  the  federal  party,  or  with  certain  in 
dividuals  of  that  party,  with  a  view  to  advance  himself  to 
the  office  of  President  to  the  exclusion  of  Mr.  Jefferson. 
Mr.  Burr  in  a  letter  to  Governor  Bloomfield,  dated  the 
21st  September  last,  declared  that  all  such  allegations 
were  false  and  groundless  ;  and  the  charges  have  been  re 
newed  in  more  recent  publications,  which  point  to  you  by 
name,  as  the  person  through  whom  such  negotiations  were 
carried  on  and  terms  concluded"  He  adds,  "  I  am  induced 
to  apply  directly  to  yourself,  as  an  authentic  source  of  in 
formation — I  do  this  with  the  more  confidence,  from  a 
persuasion  that  you  can  have  no  wish  to  suffer  false  reports 
to  circulate  under  the  authority  of  your  name,  for  mere 
party  purposes,  and  that,  in  the  actual  posture  of  things, 
you  cannot  be  averse  to  declare  publicly  and  explicitly 
your  agency,  if  any,  in  the  business.  I  take  the  liberty, 
therefore,  of  requesting  your  written  declaration  to  the 
points  above  stated^  together  with  any  circumstances  you 


may  b.e  pleased  to  communicate,  tending  to  establish  the 
truth  or  falshood  of  the  charges  in  question.*  See  the 
letter  above. 

Now  let  us  see  how  admirably  the  answer  of  Mr. 
Ogden  is  adapted  to  the  enquiries  of  Dr.  Irving  ?  Per 
sons  more  suspicious  than  ourselves  would  really  con 
clude,  from  the  perfect  harmony  that  reigns  between  the 
Doctor's  letter  and  the  negociator's  answer,  that  there 
had  been  a  previous  arrangement ;  a  kind  understanding 
between  them.  We  cannot,  however,  prove  this  in  a 
court  of  justice  ! 

Mr.  Ogden  says  "  When  about  to  return  from  the 
city  of  Washington,  two  or  three  [This  convenient  mode 
of  expressing  an  indefinite  number  may  include  twenty 
as  well  as  two  or  three]  members  of  Congress,  of  the 
federal  party,  spoke  to  me  about  their  views  as  to  the 
election  of  President,  desiring  me  to  converse  with  Col. 
Burr  on  the  subject,  and  to  ascertain  whether  he  would 
enter  into  terms.  On  my  return  to  New-York  I  called 
on  Col.  Burr  and  communicated  the  above  to  him.*  He 

NOTE. 

*  New-York,  26th,  Nov.  1802. 

In  confequence  of  the  appearance  in  the  Morning  Chronicle 
of  y  efterday  of  the  letter  of  the  Editor  to  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden 
and  his  anfwer,  I  this  day  went  to  Sing-Sing-j*  to  converfe  with 
General  DELAVAN  who  refides  there,  having  underftood  that 

•j-  A  village  09  the  banks  of  the  Hudson,  36  miles  from  the.  city  of 
New-York, 

K 


explicitly  ffeclrned  the  explanation,  and  did  neither  pro 
pose  nor  agree  to  any  terms.  I  had  no  other  interview 
or  communication  with  him  on  the  subject,  and  so  little 
was  I  satisfied  with  this,  that  in  a  letter  which  I  soon 
afterwards  wrote  to  a  member  of  Congress,  and  which 
was  the  only  one  I  wrote,  I  dissuaded  from  giving  sup 
port  to  Col.  Burr,  and  advised  rather  to  the  election  of 
Mr.  Jefferson,  as  the  less  dangerous  of  the  two  to  that 
cause  with  which  I  believed  the  public  interest  to  be  in- 
.separably  connected." 

Jince  the  publication  of  our  Eighth  Letter  Mr.  Burr  had  talk 
ed  with  him  concerning  it.  Mr.  Joiiah  Rhodes,  who  reiides  at 
SPARTA,  one  mile  from  Slag-Slog, accompanied  me  to  General 
Delavan's.  The  General  ftated  that  Mr.  Burr  in  a  converiation 
Xvith  him  adverted  to  the  charges  that  had  been  preferred  againft 
his  political  conduct.  Thefe  he  declared  were  falfe,  and  that 
he  intended  to  repel  them  in  a  manner  that  would  be  iatistaclory 
to  his  friends, but  could  not  fet  up  a  defence  in  the  AMERICAN 
CITIZEN.  Alluding  to  that  part  of  our  eighth  letter  where  it 
is  iiated  that  Mr.  Ogden  was  authorized  by  leading  federalifis 
at  Waihington  to  call  on  Mr.  Burr  to  negociate  with  him  the 
terms  on  which  they  propofed  to  elecl  himPrefident,  he  affured 
General  Delavan  that  he  did  not  know  Mr,  Qgden,  meaning,  as 
the  General  fuppofed,  that  he  knew  him  not  in  political  affairs, 
and  had  not  the  lead  recollection  of  Ogden'shaving  ipoken  to 
liirn  on  the  fubjecl.  He  fpoke  of  Air  Ogden  with  great  contempt, 
as,  faid  General  Delevan  a  fap-head  \  thefe,  the  General  added, 
were  not  Mr.  Burr's  words,  but,  that  was  certainly  his  idea. 
The  above  is  a  faithful  relation  of  General  Delavan's  con 
veriation  with  me  in  the  presence  of  Mr.  Rhode.?. 

DAVID  DENNISTOIST. 

What  shall  we  think  of  the  veracity  of  Col.  Burr?  Ogden  declares 
that  he  called  on  him  agreeably  to  the  powers  wilh  which  he  was 
clothed,  at  Washington  arid  at  Ica^t  conversed  with  him  on  the  project 
of  leading  federalists  there  to  elect  him  to  the  office  of  President.  Mr. 
BilVr  denies  it,  declares  that  he  does  not  know  Ogden,  and  has  not  the 
least  recollection  of  his  having  spoken  to  him  on  the  subject !  Q 
.times  !  Q  morals  ! 


f    «    ») 

*'  There  are  no  facts  within  my  knowledge  tending  to 
^establish  the  truth  of  the  charges  specified  in  your  letter  ;'* 
So  far  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden, 

We  cannot  complain  of  the  management  Apparent  in 
these  two  letters ;  they  exhibit  quite  as  much  cunning  as 
we  had  imagined  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Ogden  possessed. 
The  letter  of  the  latter  goes  far  to  disprove  Mr.  Burr's 
remarks  when  he  calls  him  a  sap-head;  and  if  General 
Hamilton  had  no  hand  in  its  composition  certainly  evin 
ces  that  his  title  to  that  appellation  is  defective  \ 

An  inattentive  observer  would  conclude,  after  reading 
Mr.  Ogden's  letter,  that  Mr.  Burr  is  a  much  injured 
man,  and  calumniated  beyond  example;  that  he  is  inno 
cent  as  a  lamb,  and  than  whom  a  more  immaculate  pa 
triot  never  breathed.  Fatal  conclusion  1  There  lives  not 
in  the  union  a  man  more  faithless ;  one  less  deserving 
the  confidence  of  the  people*  L«t  us  measure  the  solid 
contents  of  the  two  letters  $ 

Dr.  Irving  says,  "  It  has  been  asserted  that  the  Vice* 
President  entered  into  negotiations  AND  agreed  to  terms 
with  the  federal  pa*rty  to  advance  himself  to  the  Presi 
dency."  He  then  adds,  that  **  The  charges  have  been 
renewed  in  more  recent  publications,"  and  conclude* 
with  these  words;  "  I  take  the  liberty,  therefore,  of 
requesting  your  written  declaration  to  the  points  above 


stated"     This  is  the  quintessence  of  his  letter,  as  the 
reader  will  see  by  a  reference  to  it. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  remark  that  the  letter  is  so 
loosely  and  yet  so  attentively  worded  as  to  afford  an  op 
portunity  to  Mr.  Ogden  to  give  a  negative  answer  to  it 
without  at  the  same  time  contradicting  a  single  material 
accusation  contained  in  our  eighth.  The  vrords,  "  The 
Vice-president  entered  into  negotiations  AND  agreed  to 
terms"  convey  to  the  mind  no  precise  Idea  ;  they  are  so 
ambiguous  as  to  admit  of  a  two-fold  construction ;  so 
indefinite  as  to  permit  Mr.  Ogden  to  contradict  the  terms 
of  the  letter,  without  at  the  same  time  affecting  the 
transaction  about  which  they  are  employed.  For  ex 
ample,  Mr.  Burr  might  have  given  Mr.  Ogden  satis 
factory  assurances  of  a  disposition  to  act  cordially  with 
the  federalists  without  entering  into  precise  terms.  Ad 
mitting  ibr  a  moment  that  he  did  so — which  we  shall  by 
and  by  prove — Mr.  Ogden  might  consistently  say,  in 
reply  to  the  unmeaning  letter  of  Dr.  Irving,  that  Mr. 
Burr  "  Did  neither  propose  nor  agree  to  any  terms," 
and  "  That  there  are  no  facts  within  my  knowledge 
tending  to  establish  the  truth  of  the  charges  specified  in 
your  letter,"  because,  as  is  evident,  there  are  in  it  no 
charges  specified. 

Permit  us  to  illustrate  the  subject  by  stating  what  real 
ly  occurred  between  Mr.  Burr  and  Mr.  Ogden  who  ac 
knowledges  that  he  was  authorized,  when  at  Washing- 


ton,  by  federal  members  of  Congress,  to  call  on  and  con 
verse  with  him  about  their  views  as  to  the  election  of  Pre 
sident,  and  to  ascertain  whether  he  would  enter  into 
terms;  that  is,  in  good  old  English,  to  tender  to  Mr. 
Burr  the  specific  terms  on  which  the  federal  members  of 
Congress  proposed  to  elect  him  President,  in  case  he 
would  consent  to  betray  his  party  and  oppose  the  wishes 
and  expectations  of  the  people.  Mr.  Ogden  accordingly 
calls  on  Mr.  Burr  and  submits  to  him  two  propositions. 

First.  What,  Mr.  Burr,  would  be  the  conduct  you 
would  observe,  if  elected  by  the  means  of  the  federal 
party,  in  respect  to  certain  cardinal  points  of  federal  po» 
licij  ?  To  which  he  replies  in  gentle  accents,  "  With 
regard  to.  this  question  it  would  not  be  proper  or  expedient 
to  enter  into  explanation"  In  this  answer,  which  is  the 
one  he  actually  gave,  although  we  perceive  a  solicitude 
to  avoid  agreeing  to  definite  terms^  because  it  would  not 
be  proper  or  expedient^  yet  it  is  apparent  that  he  was  dis 
posed  to  favor  the  project,  and  to  give  such  assurances  to 
Mr.  Ogden  of  a  willingness  to  act  cordially  with  his  par 
ty,  if  elected  by  their  means,  as  would  to  them  be  per 
fectly  satisfactory.  This  is  as  much — considering  the 
nature  of  the  transaction — as  could  be  expected ;  and  yet, 
as  Dr.  Irving  expresses  it,  it  is  not  entering  into,  terms  ! 

Secondly.  What  co-operation  and  aid,  Mr.  Burr, 
could  you  and  would  you  afford  towards  procuring  suc 
cess  to  your  own  election,  if  the  attempt  should  be  made  f 


(    5-8    ) 

To  which  he  answers,  "  ThaJ;  as  to  this  point, 
ralists  might  be  assured  that  New- York  and  Tennessee 
on  a  second  ballot  would  vote  for  him,  and  that  probably 
New-Jersey  might  be  induced  to  do  the  same."  Now 
here  Mr.  Burr  enters  not  into  terms  to  use  the  elegant 
and  accommodating  phrase  of  Dr.  Irving,  and  yet  it  is 
apparent  that  he  gives  the  negociator  such  an  unequivocal 
earnest  of  his  approbation  of  the  scheme,  as  to  leave  not 
-a  .doubt  en  the  mind  of  himself,  or  of  those  who  had 
vested  him  with  diplomatic  powers,  of  his  disposition  to 
promote  it ;  so  that  although  Mr.  Ogden  says  Mr.  Burr 
*'  did  neither  propose  nor  agree  to  terms"  it  does  not 
thence  follow  that  he  did  not  give  the  most  undeniable 
assurances  of  willingness,  nay  of  solicitude  to  a/Win  car 
rying  the  federal  project  into  prompt  and  vigorous  exe 
cution  ;  on  the  contrary  it  is  conclusive  evidence  of  an 
entire  assent  unencumbered  with  the  inconveniences  of 
an  agreement  to  specific  terms. 

From  these  remarks  it  follows  that  Irving  and  Ogden's 
letters  are  mere  nullities,  and  if  not  intended  are  certainly 
calculated  to  deceive  ;  for  although  the  former  asks  whe 
ther  terms  were  entered  into  by  Mr.  Burr,  and  the  latter 
denies  that  they  were,  yet  it  is  palpable  that  he  might  ha.ve 
entered  fully  into  the  views  of  the  negociator  without 
agreeing  to  terms.  Dr.  Irving,  therefore,  risked  nothing 
£or  his  friend  Mr.  Burr  when  he  asked  the  negociator 
whether  he  had  entered  into  terms,  and  requested  a 
^  Written  declaration  ts  $\z  points  above  stated." 


(    79    ) 

And  what  are  those  points  above  stated?  If  the  reader 
will  cast  his  eye  on  the  Doctor's  letter  and  read  it  over 
with  attention,  he  will  find  that  it  contains  710  points  to 
\fhich  this  inapl  allusion  is  made.  The  only  passage  in 
it  called  points  above  stated  is  included  in  the  second 
paragraph,  thus  expressed  "  It  has  been  asserted/'  &c. 
that  Mr.  Burr  "  entered  into  negodatlon  and  agreed  to 
terms  ;"  if  die  reader  can  find  in  these  words  way  precis* 
points^  to  which  Mr.  Ogden  could  satisfactorily  reply, 
then  will  we  say  that  the  Doctor's  phraseology  is  correct^ 
and  that  he  had  no  intention  to  mislead. 

To  Dr.  Irving's  request  of  a  written  declaration  to  the 
points  above  stated,  the  negociator  answers,  "  There  are 
no  facts  within  my  knowledge  tending  to  establish  the 
truth  of  the  charges  specified  in  your  letter"  The  reader 
is  by  this  time  no  doubt  convinced  that  there  are  no  chqr- 
gesin  the  Doctor's  letter ,  and  therefore  Mr.  Ogden  might- 
with  truth  say  that  there  were  no  facts  within  his  know 
ledge  tending  to  establish  them ! 

One  word  more.  If  the  points  above  stated  include  the 
negodatlon  entered  into,  then  has  Mr.  Ogden  contradicted 
himself,  for  he  expressly  declares  that  he  was  empowered 
by  federal  members  of  Congress  to  converse  with  Mr. 
Burr,  and  to  ascertain  whether  he  would  enter  into  terms ; 
that  he  accordingly  waited  on  Mr.  Burr  and  submitted  to 
him  suitable  propositions. 


(     80    ) 

But  if  the  points  above  stated  mean  terms,  as  the  Doctor 
very  neatly  has  it,  then  have  we  shewn  that  there  are  na 
points^  because  Mr.  Burr  might  have  given,  and  did  actu 
ally  give,  every  encouragement  within  his  power  to  the 
iniquitous  scheme  without  agreeing  to  definite  terms. 

Let  us  now  suppose  that  Dr.  Irving,  actuated  by  a  lau 
dable  desire  to  ascertain  the  truth  with  regard  to  the  ne- 
gociation,  wrote  his  letter  to  Mr.  Ogden.  What  method 
ought  he  to  have  pursued  to  accomplish  this  object  ?  We 
have  seen  that  his  asking  Mr.  Ogden  whether  Mr.  Burr 
entered  into  negotiations  and  agreed  to  terms^  was  as  use 
less,  as  Mr.  Ogden's  answer,  that  he  did  neither  propose 
nor  agree  to  terms,  was  ridiculous. 

He  ought  to  have  said — Sir, 

f<  It  has  been  publicly  asserted  that  you  were  authorized 
by  leading  federalists  at  Washington  to  negociave  with 
Mr.  Burr  the  conditions  on  which  they  proposed  to  elect 
him  President ;  that  you  accordingly  waited  on  and  sub- 
xnittedto  him  two  propositions. 

w  First,  What  would  be  the  conduct  he  would  observe, 
if  elected  by  the  federalists,  in  respect  to  certain  cardinal 
points  of  federal  policy  f  And  secondly,  What  co-opera 
tion  and  aid  he  could  and  would  afford  towards  procuring 
success  to  his  own  election,  if  ihe  attempt  should  be 
Blade"  I 


(     81      ) 

"  To  which  it  is  subjoined  Mr.  Burr  made  the  follow 
ing  answer  in  substance. 

"  That  as  to  the  first  point,  it  would  not  be  proper  or 
expedient  to  enter  into  explanation.  That  as  to  the  se 
cond  point,  the  federalists  might  be  assured  that  New- 
York  and  Tennessee  on  a  second  ballot  would  vote  for 
him,  and  that  probably  New- Jersey  might  be  induced  to 
do  the  same." 

"  Will  you  be  so  obliging  as  to  inform  me  in  writing 
whether  those  propositions  were  made  by  you,  and  these 
answers  given  by  Mr.  Burr"  ? 

The  propositions  and  answers  above  are  extracted 
from  our  eighth  letter,  and  if  they  had  been  put  to  Mr. 
Ogden  by  Dr.  Irving  as  here  stated,  and  as  they  ought 
to  have  been,  Mr.  Ogden  would  have  had  no  loop-hole  to 
have  crept  out  of.  But  instead  of  submitting  these  plain, 
interrogatories  to  Mr.  Ogden,  he  is  asked  whether  Mr. 
Burr  entered  into  negotiations  and  agreed  to  terms  ! 

This  was  irrelative,  since  it  is  obvious  that  Mr.  Burr 
does  not,  in  the  above  answers  given  by  him,  agree  tat 
terms,  and  yet  who  will  say  that  they  do  not  manifest 
entire  acquiescence  in  the  project  of  the  negociator? 
If  those  questions  had  been  asked,  Mr.  Ogden  must  have 
told  us  whether  Mr.  Burr,  by  encouraging  the  opposi 
tion  tq  Mr.  Jefferson  in  favor  of  himself,  did  not  say 


(     82     ) 

that  after  the  second  ballot  Ne%v -Tor k  and  Tennessee  would 
•vote  for  him,  and  that  probably  New-  Jersey  might  be  in 
duced  to  do  the  same  ?  This  would  have  determined  how 
far  Mr.  Burr  favored  the  opposition  to  Mr.  Jefferson 
and  the  views  of  the  negociator,  for  Mr.  Ogden  could 
not  have  availed  himself  of  unworthy  evasion.  In  saying, 
therefore,  in  answer  to  Dr.  Irving's  letter,  that  Mr. 
B  urr  did  neither  propose  nor  agree  to  ternis^  Mr.  Ogden.' 
leaves  the  only  material  point  untouched;  for  if  Mr. 
Burr  told  the  negociator,  in  answer  to  his  question, 
what  co-operation  and  aid  he  wild  and  ruiuIJ  ajf-ird  to- 
ivards  procuring  success  to  his  own  election  ?  that  after  the 
second  ballot  New-Tor  k  and  Tennessee  would  vote  for  him+ 
and  probably  New-Jersey  might  be  induced  to  do  the  samcy 
it  was  in  fact  meeting  the  views  of  Mr.  Ogden  as  iully 
sis  if  Mr.  Burr  had  entered  into  specific  terms. 

We  repeat  that  the  ans  wer  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the  second 
proposition  was  the  only  point  that  called  for  the  ir.ter- 
ppsit'on  of  Dr.  Irving  and  the  letter  of  Mr.  Ogden. 
We  did  not  state  in  our  eighth  letter  that  Mr.  Bun-  either 
entered  into  explanation  or  agreed  to  terms  with  the  ne 
gociator.  It  suited,  however,  the  views  of  the  friends 
of  Mr.  Burr  in  this  city  that  Dr.  Irving's  letter  should 
be  couched  as  if  we  had  so  stated,  that  a  denial  from 
Mr.  Ogden  might  appear,  to  the  less  thinking  part  of 
the  community,  as  a  contradiction  of  the  facts  contained 
in  our  eighth  letter.  It  was  a  shallow  artifice;-  a  branch 
4>f  the  necromancy  of  the  niachinalora* 


.(     83     ) 

Let  us  see  how  far  Mr.  Ogden's  letter  and  our  eighth 


differ. 


Iii  that  letter  we  stated,  first,  that  Mr.  Ogden  ^yas 
authorized  by  leading  federalists  at  Washington  to  ne- 
gociate  with  Mr.  Burr  the  terms  on  which  they  pro 
posed  to  elect  him  president;  that  to  the  first  proposi 
tion,  namely,  "  What  would  be  the  conduct  he  would 
observe,  if  elected  by  the  means  of  the  federalists,  in 
respect  to  certain  cardinal  points of  federal  policy .?"  he 
answered,  that  "  it  would  not  be  proper  or  expedient  to 
enter  into  explanation"  See  the  eighth  letter.  That 
to  the  second,  to  wit,  "  What  co-operation  and  aid  he 
could  and  would  afford  towards  procuring  success  to 
"his  own  election,  if  the  attempt  should  be  made?"  He 
replied,  that  "  the  federalists  might  be  assured  that 
New- York  and  Tennessee,  011  a  second  ballot,  would 
vote  for  him,  and  probably  New-Jersey  might  be  induced 
to  do  the  same."  These  were  the  propositions  and  an* 
awers  as  stated  in  our  eighth  letter,  which  see. 

Let  us  now  compare  them  with  Mr.  Ogden's  letter,. 
and  see  whether  the  two  differ  in  any  essential  point. 

Mr.  Ogden  says  that  he  called  on  Mr.  SUIT  accord 
ing  to  the  powers  with  which  he  was  clothed  and  of 
course,  submitted  to  him  his  propogition,  out  tnat  he> 

explicitly  declined  the  explanation?     So  far  vre 


(     84     ) 

we  say  he  replied  to  the  first  proposition,  that  "  it 
would  not  be  proper  or  expedient  to  enter  into  explana 
tion"  But  Mr.  Ogden  states  that  Mr.  Burr  "  didnelther 
propose  nor  agree  to  terms."  WE  NEVER  SAID  HE 
DID;  so  that  here  there  is  no  difference  between  us. 
Nor  was  it,  to  enter  fully  into  the  views  of  Mr.  Ogden, 
essential  that  he  should  agree  to  terms,  as  we  have  al 
ready  shewn.  His  declaring  that  the  states  enumerated 
would  relinquish  Mr.  Jefferson  after  the  second  ballot 
and  vote  for  him,  evinces  that,  without  entering  into 
previse  terms^  he  assented  to  the  propositions  of  the  ne- 
gociator,  and  entered  fully  into  his  views. 

Mr.  Ogden,  however,  differs  from  us  in  this :  we  say 
he  had  two  interviews  with  Mr.  Burr;  he  says  only  one; 
but  this  is  quite  immaterial.  We  shall  nevertheless  give 
an  extract  from  a  letter  -written  by  General  Hamilton^  to 
prove  that  he  had  two  interviews  with  Mr.  Burr. 

So  much  for  the  letters  of  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Ogde* 
which,  it  may  be  emphatically  said,  are  mere  "  Traps  to 
catch  Woodcocks.'* 

There  is  one  remark,  however,  in  Mr.  Ogden's  letter 
that  ought  to  be  noticed.  He  says,  "  I  had  no  other 
interview  or  communication  with  Mr.  Burr  on  the  sub 
ject,  and  so  little  was  I  satisfied  with  this,  that  in  a  let 
ter  which  I  soon  afterwards  wrote  to  a  member  of  £on- 


(     85     ) 

gress,  and  which  was  the  only  one  I  wrote,  I  dissuaded 
from  giving  support  to  Col.  Burr,"  &c. 

It  is  to  us  problematical  whether  Mr.  Ogden's  zeal 
to  co-operate  with  a  handful  of  Mr.  Burr's  friends  in 
this  city — to  throw  a  matter  of  doubt  over  the  transac 
tion — has  not  induced  him,  at  this  period,  to  misrepre 
sent  the  past  convictions  of  his  own  mind  concerning 
his  negociation  with  Col.  Burr,  and  the  cordiality  with 
which  he  was  received  by  him.  Since  the  presidential 
election,  Mr.  Ogden  has  expressed  an  opinion  the  re 
verse  of  that  which  we  have  just  quoted.  In  a  conver 
sation  which  he  had  with  Dr.  TILLOTSON,  secretary  of 
state,  of  this  state,  he  declared  himself  as  follows.  "  If 
it  had  not  been,"  says  Mr.  Ogden,  "  for  a  foolish  letter, 
or  d— d  foolish  letter,  Col.  Burr  wrote  to  General  Smith 
of  Baltimore,  he  would  now  have  been  President  of  the 
United  States."  This  declaration,  for  the  truth  of  which 
the  reader  is  referred  to  Dr.  Tillotsoa,  Mr.  Ogden  made 
in  Albany.  He  has  since  repeated  it  to  Dr.  Tillotson  in 
the  presence  of  Mr.  RIKER,  of  this  city,  the  district  at 
torney.  We  have  shewn  the  words  in  inverted  commas 
to  Mr.  Hiker,  who  says  they  are  correct. 

Now  on  what  was  Mr.  Ogden's  opinion  founded,  that 
if  it  had  not  been  for  a  foolish  letter  written  by  Mr. 
Burr  to  General  Smith  he  would  have  been  President 
of  the  United  States?  Was  it  not  on  the  arrangements 
he  had  made  with  Mr,  Burr  ?  Was  it  it  not  QJI  Mr.  Burr's 


prospect,  as  Mr.  Ogden  thought,  of  success  if  it  had 
not  been  for  a.  foolish  letter  he  afterwards  wrote  ?  Mr. 
Ogdtn  no~jj  says,  "  And  so  little  was  I  satisfied  wi:h 
that  interview,  that  in  a  letter  I  afterwards  wrote  I  dis 
suaded,  &c."  And  yet  sometime  before  he  wrote  his 
famous  epistle  to  Dr.  Irving,  so  well  satisfied  was  lie 
with  the  arrangements  he  had  made  with  Col.  Burr, 
that  he  declared  if  it  had  not  been  jf#r  a  foolish  letter  Mr. 
Jjurr  wrote  t3  General  Smith ,  he  would  have  been  Presi 
dent  of  the.  United  States  !  We  leave  the  reader  to  deter- 
e  whether  lie  will  believe  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  after 
the  Presidential  election,  or  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  in 
his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving  ?  If  his  remarks  to  Dr.  Tillotson 
were  correct — which  is  most  probable — those  contained 
in  his  letter  to  the  Editor  of  the  Morning  Chronicle  just 
quoted,  are  not ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  if  those  which 
he  communicated  to  Dr.  Irving  are  truey  we  need  not 
denominate  the  complexion  of  the  declaration  he  made 
to  Dr.  Tillotson,  and  confirmed  in  the  presence  of  Mr. 
Hiker.  Mr.  David  A.  Ogden  may  take  his  choice  of  the 
dilemma,  and  reconcile  if  he  can  the  contradictions  ! 

We  are,  however,  persuaded  that  Mr.  Ogclen  has  been 
induced,  by  much  solicitation  and  importunity,  to  write 
his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving,  and  to  couch  it  in  such  terms  as 
leave  no  favorable  impressions  of  his  heart.  Grains  of 
allowance,  perhaps,  ought  to  be  made  on  account  of  the 
artfulness  of  the  do&hlc*meani*.g  letter  te  which  he  replied. 
He  was  asked  for  information  only  on  "  negotiations  ea- 


(     87     ) 

terecl  into  and  terms*'  concluded  between  himself  and 
Col.  Burr  ;  and  being  confined  to  this  limited,  and,  as  it 
respects  the  word  "  terms,"  unknown  enquiry,  no  terms 
having  been  agreed  upon,  he  was  in  a  manner  compelled, 
by  the  curious  phraseology  of  Dr.  Irving's  letter,  to  say 
cn/y  that  Mr.  Burr  entered  not  into  terms.  Had  Mr.  Og- 
tlen  stated  the  encouragement  held  out  to  him  by  Col.  Burr, 
such  as  his  mentioning  the  states  who  would  relinquish  I'Jr. 
jcffcrson.  after,  ths  second  ballot,  and  his  opinion  of  Mr. 
Burr's  perfect  acquiesence  in  his  propositions,  although  lit; 
did  not  agree  to  terms,  he  would  have  transcended  the 
clear  design  of  Dr.  Irving's  letter,  which  was  to  confine 
him  to  terms  agreed  upon.  Still  he  is  not  blameless  ;  for 
en  a  subject  of  so  much  importance  he  ought  to  have  told 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  how 
ever  ill  it  might  have  comported  with  the  object  of  him 
who  affected  to  make  enquiries  appropriate  to  ths  accusa 
tions  with  regard  to  the  negociation,  viz.  the  propositions 
of  Mr.  Ogden,  and  the  answers  given  by  Mr.  Burr. 

Circumstances,  however,  concur  to  favor  the  opinion, 
that  between  General  Hamilton,  Col.  Burr,  the  negoci- 
ator,  Mr.  J.  O.  Hoffman,  late  attorney  general  of  this 
state,  and  Dr.  Irving,  there  was  a  previous  understanding. 

The  coincidence  of  phraseology  between  the  letter  of 
Dr.  Irving,  and  the  answer  of  Mr,  Ogden,  is  calculated 
to  awaken  suspicions  of  a  previous  understanding.  Dr. 
Irving,  evidently  solicitous  to  avoid  particular*,  asks  Mr, 


C     83     ) 

Ogdenif  Mr.  Burr  agreed  to  terms,  and  in  his  reply,  the 
negotiator,  equally  anxious  to  shun  detail,  avails  himself 
of  the  same  generality  of  expression,  as  if  by  preconcert, 
and  says  Mr.  Burr  did  neither  propose  nor  agree  to  terms. 

In  the  second  paragraph  of  his  letter  Dr.  Irving  ob 
serves,  and  the  CHARGES  have  been  renewed  in  more 
recent  publications,  &c.  and  in  the  last  paragraph  he'says, 
/  take  the  liberty  therefore  of  requesting  your  -written 
declaration  to  the  POINTS  ABOVE  STATED.  That 
these  words  should  be  used  by  Dr.  Irving,  is  not  a  little 
remarkable  ;  there  are  no  precise  CHARGES  enume 
rated  in  his  letter,  no  POINTS  ABOVE  STATED. 

Reader,  observe  the  accordance  between  Dr.  Irving'* 
CHARGES  and  POINTS  ABOVE  STATED,  and 
the  answer  of  Mr.  Ogden  thereto. 

In  the  last  paragraph  of  his  letter,  which  see,  Mr.  Og 
den  says,  "  there  are  no  facts  within  mij  knowledge  tending 
to  establish  the  truth  of  the  CHARGES  SPECIFIED 
IN  YOUR  LETTER."  This  is  undoubtedly  true, 
and  for  the  plainest  reason  in  the  world,  because  the 
doctor's  letter  contains  no  CHARGES,  unless  it  be  said 
that  terms  are  charges,  and  if  so,  let  it  be  remembered 
that  they  were  never  made  by  us;  for  although  we 
were  extremely  sensible  that  Air.  Burr  entered  fully 
into  the  views  of  the  negockitor,  in  the  manner  already 


explained,  yet  we  were  not  less  so  that  he  did  not  a 
to  specific  terms. 

Could  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Ogden,  whose  letters  are 
gross  impositions  upon  the  public,  have  played  so  admi 
rably  into  each  other's  hands  without  preconcert?  Could 
Dr.  Irving  have  penned  a  letter  which,  strictly  speaking, 
did  not  admit  of  an  answer  touching  the  actual  charges 
preferred  against  the  Vice-President,  but  which  at  the 
same  time  was  eminently  calculated  to  screen  Mr.  Burr 
by  drawing  from  Mr.  Ogden  a  reply  intended  and  fitted 
to  perplex  a  transaction  in  its  nature  extremely  myste 
rious  ? 

The  conduct  of  the  Morning  Chronicle  and  Evening 
Post  is,  on  this  subject,  a  circumstance  worthy  of  notice. 
If  the  former  is  not  under  the  direct  influence  of,  it  is 
undoubtedly  patronized  by,  CoL  Burr;  the  fetter  is  une 
quivocally  controuled  by  the  will  of  General  Hamilton. 
In  every  question  agitated  concerning  the  Vice-Presi 
dent  since  the  establishment  of  the  Morning  Chronicle, 
this  paper  and  the  Evening  Post  have  pursued  the  same 
system,  acted  in  the  same  manner,  declaimed  with  equal 
zeal  and  illiberality  in  favour  of  Col.  Burr,  petulantly 
and  magisterially  pronounced  him  innocent,  and  accused 
us  of  being  actuated  by  improper  motives  in  our  endea 
vours  to  develope  a  most  mischievous  plot  at  som-e  hazard, 
and  with  no  little  labour  and  anxiety. 

M 


(   so   ) 

The  remarks  of  Dr.  Irving,  whether  intended  to  ex 
culpate  Mr.  Burr,  or  to  criminate  ourselves,  are  uniform 
ly  published  in  the  Evening  Post,  accompanied  with  com 
mendatory  observations  from  Mr.  Coleman,  and  effusions  of 
a  most  rancorous  and  malignant  nature  against  ourselves 
for  the  part  we  have  acted  in  the  controversy,  are  now 
acting,  and  shall  continue  to  act.  In  short,  there  is, 
whether  by  express  agreement  or  not  we  cannot  say,  a 
most  cordial  co-operation  between  these  two  papers  in 
every  thing  that  concerns  Col.  Burr. 

Can  we  then  say  that  the  leaders  of  the  federal  party 
in  this  city  do  not  favour  the  schemes  of  Col.  Burr;  that 
•a  coalition  in  fact  is  not  formed  between  them,  himself, 
and  his  few  friends  here  ?  What  better  evidence  do  we 
want  of  this  coalition,  what  more  convincing  can  we  have 
<than  that  union  of  their  presses,  the  barometers  of  pub 
lic  opinion,  whichvfe  too  palpable  to  be  doubted? 

It  must  be  that  General  Hamilton  connives  at  this 
union  for  party  purposejHo  corrobate  his  party  by  the 
^division  of  our  own,  or  Mr.  Coleman  would  not  for  a 
moment  act  in  concert  with  the  Morning  Chronicle. 

Hence  we  conjecture  that  there  is  an  understanding 
between  Col.  Burr  and  General  Hamilton,  and  the  ground 
of  this  conjecture  is  a  cordial  union  of  action,  in  whate 
ver  relates  to  the  former,  between  the  two  prints  presum 
ed  to  .be  devoted  to  the  promotion  of  their  views* 


(     91     ) 

Again — Mr.  J.  O.  Hoffman,  afederalist^who  is  known 
to  be  on  the  best  terms  of  friendship  with  Col.  Burr, 
and  a  most  warm  and  obsequious  attendant  on  General 
Hamilton,  teased  and  pestered  the  negociator  to  write 
in  exculpation  of  the  Vice-President ;  and  he  seems  to 
have  ultimately  succeeded  in  inducing  Mr.  Ogden  to 
pen  that  unmeaning  thing  on  which  we  have  com 
mented. 

Nor  was  the  appearance  of  Mr.  Ogden's  letter  unex 
pected  by  us.  We  had  reason  to  suspect  preconcert  be 
tween  the  persons  named.  We  were  not  ignorant  of  the 
importunities  of  Mr.  Hoffman  ;  we  knew  that  Mr.  Burr 
paid  visits  to  the  negociator,  and  we  were  told  by  Mr. 
Melancton  Smith,  (a  relation  by  affinity  to  Mr.  Swart* 
wout,  marshal,  and  who  we  have  good  cause  to  believe 
knows  well  the  secret  movements  of  the  parties  in  ques 
tions)  we  were  told  by  Mr.  Smith  on  the  19th  day  of  No 
vember,  Jive  days  before  Mr.  Ogden's  letter  appeared^ 
that  he  had  giving  a  writing  denying^  -as  he  said,  the  facts 
stated  in  our  eighth  letter  with  regard  to  the  negotiations 
and  so  confident  was  he  of  this,  that  he  offered  to  wager, 
and  would  have  wagered  one  hundred  dollars  with  the 
writer,  that  Mr.  Ogden  had  given  such  a  writing.  Mr* 
Smith's  cousin,  is,  with  Dr.  Irving,  joint  proprietor  of 
the  Morning  Chronicle.  We  will  add  one  or  two  other 
reasons  for  suspecting  a  previous  understanding  among 
the  parties. 


When  our  eighth  letter  appeared  Mr.  Ogden  was  out 
of  town,  but  shortly  after  returned.     Between  his  return 
and  the  date  of  his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving  several  weeks 
elapsed.     During  this  interval  the  movements  of  this 
heterogeneous  body  were  strongly  indicative  of  contrivance 
to  favour  Mr.  Burr.     Nothing  particular,  however,  was 
done  until  Mr.  Ogden  concluded  to  write  something 
which  it  was  hoped  would  operate,  if  not  an  acquittal  of 
Mr.  Burr,  at  least  to  embarrass  the  public  mind.     It  is 
believed  that  this  decision  was,  immediately  after  it  was 
come  to,  made  known  to  Col.  Burr,  who  in  all  prabability 
communicated  it  to  his    confidential  friends,    Messrs. 
Swartwout  and  Van  Ness,  and  that  matters  were  so  ar 
ranged  as  that  Dr.  Irving  should  write  to  Mr.  Ogden  in 
the  capacity  of  an  Editor,  and  shape  his  letter  by  the 
manner  in  which  it  was  understood  Mr.  Ogden  would 
write. 

Accordingly,  on  the  24th  of  November,  all  things 
-prepared,  Dr.  Irving  wrote  to  Mr.  Ogden,  to  which  an 
answer  was  immediately  returned  and  both  appeared  the 
following  day  in  the  Morning  Chronicle* 

It  is  well  known  in  this  city,  that  on  that  day,  Mr. 
Ogden  was,  the  greater  part  if  not  the  whole  of  it, 
actually  engaged  in  court  in  a  suit  of  immense  conse 
quence  involving  in  its  issue  the  sum  of  TEN  THOUSAND 

DOLLARS. 


It  is  not  pretended  that  Mr.  Ogden  could  not  discharge 
in  court  pressing  professional  duty  and  answer  Dr.  Irving's 
letter  the  same  day.     But  is  it  usual  for  a  legal  character 
to  leave  business  in  which  he  is  intensely  engaged  to  an 
swer  a  letter  immediately  after  its  reception,  and  that  too 
so  early  in  the  day  as  that  both  shall  appear  in  a  public 
print  the  following  morning  ?  Is  it  not  probable  that  the 
matter  was  perfectly  understood  previous  to  the  date  of 
the  letters,  that  it  was  known  hvwfar  Mr.  Ogden  would 
go,  if  not  by  Dr.  Irving,  at  least  by  intermediate  persons  who 
acted  between  Mr.  Burr,  the  aegociator,  and  himself  ? 

If,  notwithstanding  what  has  been  said,  doubts  still  re 
main  in  the  mind  of  any  concerning  this  previous  under 
standing^  Dr.  Irving  has  himself  furnished  us  with  such 
clear  and  undeniable  testimony  of  it  as  cannot  fail  to  dissi 
pate  them.  He  has  confessed  sufficient  for  our  purpose, and 
we  will  venture  to  say  to  satisfy  evtry  reflecting  man,  that 
a  previous  understanding  between  Mr.  Ogden,  Mr.  Burr, 
or  some  of  his  confidential  friends  did  undoubtedly  exist. 
To  this  confession,  which  is  extremely  important,  we  in 
vite  the  attention  of  the  reader,  not  for  our  own  but  for 
his  sake,  for  it  indicates  much  and  proves  satisfactorily 
an  understanding  between  the  partizans  of  Mr.  Burr,  (if 
not  Mr.  Burr  himself)  and  the  negociator. 

On  Monday  last  a  communication  appeared  in  the 
AMERICAN  CITIZEN,  signed   "  PLAIN  DEALER,"    In 


(    9*    ) 

tliis  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Ogden  are  accused  of  preconcert. 
Dr.  Irving,  in  the  Morning  Chronicle  of  Wednesday,  at 
tempts  tojustify  himself  in  a  production  to  which  he  affixes- 
his  name.  The  remarks,  which  contain  his  defence,  we 
here  lay  before  the  reader,  that  he  may  have  a  full  view 
of  the  subject,  and  be  enabled  to  judge  for  himself  from 
*the  confessions  of  Dr.  Irving,  who  says, 

*c  I  feel  a  propriety  in  declaring  that  though,  from  our 
mutual  residence  in  this  city,  I  have  probably  seen  Mr» 
Ogden,  he  has  never  been  designated  to  me,  and  I  have 
no  personal  knowledge  of  him,  nor  have  I  had  any  con 
versation  with  him,  cither  verbal  or  written,  except 
^merely  that  letter  and  reply." 

*c  I  had  several  times  heard  of  Mr.  Ogderfs  having  ex 
pressed  in  conversation  a  readiness  to  speak  explicitly  on 
the  subject  of  his  reported  negocialion  with  CoL  Burry  if 
requested  by  any  person  -whom  he  sJwuld  consider  worthy 
of  an  answer  ;  yet  I  entirely  and  unequivocally  disavow 
any  preconcert  or  private  understanding  with  him,  direct 
or  indirect,  either  with  respect  to  that  correspondence, 
or  to  any  transaction  whatever."  In  this  paragraph,  as 
the  reader  will  perceive,  Dr.  Irving  fully  confirms  the  sus 
picions  we  have  suggested  of  an  understanding.  Illustra 
tion,  however,  may  be  useful. 

It  is  admitted,  because  so  stated,  that  Dr.  Irving  is  to 
tally  unacquainted  with  the  person  of  Mr.  Ogden.  But  what 


(  to  J 

has  this  to  do  with  a  full  understanding  between  the  par 
ties  ?  It  was  not  necessary  that  Dn  Irving  should  be  per- 
sonally  acquainted  with  Mr.  Ogden  to  comprehend  in  w&zf 
•manner  he  would  write  or  how  far  he  would  venture  to 
•commit  himself  to  the  public  in  exculpation  of  Mr.  Burr. 
'Both  these  points  could  be  accurately  conveyed  to  Dr.  Ir 
ving  by  intermediate  persons  in  whose  veracity  he  could 
rest  as  securely  as  if  communicated  to  him  by  Mr.  Ogden 
himself.  This  truth  every  one  will  readily  comprehend, 
and  to  it  cordially  assent.  Whence  it  follows  that  it  was 
not  necessary  for  Dr.  Irving  to  be  personally  acquainted 
with  Mr.  Ogdcn  to  understand  him  most  fully  on  the 
subject.  His  remarks,  therefore,  on  personal  acquaint 
ance  are  as  futile  as  they  are  irrelevant. 

This,  although  not  perceived  by  himself,  Dr.  Irving  am- 
j)ly  concedes  in  his  following  paragraph  above  quoted  and 
underscored.  He  says,  "  /  had  several  times  heard  of  Mr* 
Ogderfs  having  expressed  in  conversation  a  readiness  t& 
speak  explicitly  on  the  subject  on  his  reported  negotiation 
with  Col.  Burr,  if  requested  by  aferso.il  -whom,  he  should 
consider  worthy  of  an 


SEVERAL  TIMES  HEARD!  To  whom  did  Mr.  Ogdea 
express  this  readiness  to  speak  on  the  negociation,  and 
who  communicated  to  Dr,  Irving  his  having  so  express* 
ed  himself?  Were  they  not  the  partizansof  Mr.  Burr 
,to  whom  Mr.  Ogden  so  expressed  himself  ,  and  who'wita 


(     95     ) 

alacrity  conveyed  the  agreeable  expressions  to  Dr.  Irving  ? 
Say,  were  they  the  friends  of  the  administration,  men 
who  reprobate  the  plots  of  Mr.  Burr,  to  whom  Mr.  Og- 
den  made  this  free  communication  of  his  readiness  to 
speak  on  the  negotiation,  and  who  several  times  repeated 
them  to  Dr.  Irving?  'Tis  impossible  ;  it  is  the  most  prc» 
posterous  of  all  absurdities  to  suppose  it. 

Let  us  suppose  a  case  to  evince,  as  far  as  a  negative  po 
sition  can  be  proved,  that  it  was  not  to  persons  known  or 
supposed  to  be  inimical  to  the  machinations  of  Col.  Burr 
to  whom  Mr.  Ogden  freely  expressed  his  readiness  to  write 
on  the  negotiation  he  entered  into  with  him,  and  who  seve 
ral  times  repeated  the  expressions  to  Dr.  Irving.  We 
will  presume  that  this  expressed  readiness  had  been  com 
municated  to  a  friend  of  ours,  and  by  him  imparted  to 
us.  We  accordingly  write  to  Mr.  Ogden  and  say, 

«  Sir, 

"  We  have  in  our  possession  the  most  indubitable  tes 
timony  that  you  were  authorized  by  leading  federalists  at 
Washington  to  tender  to  Mr.  Burr  two  propositions  to 
which,  if  he  assented,  they  proposed  to  elect  him  Presi 
dent  ;  that  accordingly  you  called  on  him  in  this  city  and 
submitted  the  propositions,  to  wit." 

"  What  would  be  the  conduct- he  would  observe,  if 
elected  by  the  federalists,  in  respect  to  certain  cardinal 
points  of  federal policy  fn 


"  And  secondly,  What  co-operation  and  aid  he  cculd 
and  would  afford  toward  procuring  success  to  his  own 
election,  if  the  attempt  should  be  made  ? 

u  To  which,  the  same  authority  info rms  us ,  Mr.  Burr 
gave  the  following  answers,  viz. 

"  That  as  to  the  first  point,  it  would  not  be  proper  ot 
expedient  to  enter  into  explanation.  That  with  regard  to 
the  second  point,  the  federalists  might  be  assured  that 
New- York  and  Tennessee  on  a  second  ballot  would  vote 
for  him,  and  that  probably  New-Jersey  might  be  induced 
to  do  the  same." 

"  Did  you  tender  to  Mr.  Burr  those  propositions  and 
receive  from  him  these  answers  ?" 

In  answer  to  these  propositions  and  replies  Mr.  Ogden 
could  not  have  prevaricated.  His  saying  Mr.  Burr 
agreed  not  to  terms  would  have  been  impertinent.  He 
must  have  told  us  whether  he  submitted  to  Mr.  Burr  th£ 
questions,  and  received  from  him  the  answers  stated.  Had 
he  replied  in  the  affirmative,  there  would  have  been  an 
end  to  the  matter,  since  Mr,  Burr's  answer  to  the  last 
proposition,  is  a  full  assent  to  the  terms  offered ;  if  in  the 
negative,  which  as  a  man  placing  some  value  on  his 
reputation  he  durst  tutt,  we  would  have  proved  to  the  con 
viction  of  all  honest  and  refecting  men?  that  Mr.  Ogdert 
is  Ktte rly  destitute  of  veracity,  and  unworthy  of  <;r<?de.nc.e* 

N 


(     98     ) 

But  he  wished  not  to  be  put  to  such  a  test  ;  he  sighed  for 
an  opportunity  to  evade  and  prevaricate  j  and  he  therefore 
communicated  his  readiness  to  the  partizans  of  Col.  Burr, 
the  manner  in  which  he  would  write,  the  extent  to  which 
he  would  go,  and  all  this  was  imparted  and  repeated  seve 
ral  times  to  Dr.  Irving  who,  understanding  him  perfectly, 
although  unacquainted  with  his  person,  wrote  to  him  ac 
cordingly  about  terms  agreed  upon,  and  charges^  and 
points  above  stated  !  / 

Again.  It  cannot  be  that  Mr.  Ogclen  expressed  his  rea 
diness  to  citizens  hostile  to  the  wicked  contrivances  of  Col. 
Burr ;  if  he  had,  the  information  must  have  been  conveyed 
to  us.  For  who  were  so  fit  to  write  to  him  on  the  subject 
as  those  who  had  publicly  accused  himself  and  Mr.  Burr 
of  the  negociation  ?  And  yet  we  never  heard  a  -word  of 
such  a  readiness.  On  the  contrary  we  were  persuaded 
that  if  Mr.  Ogden  valued  his  reputation,  it  would  com 
port  with  its  preservation  to  remain  silent ;  we  were  there 
fore  of  opinion  that  unless  some  uncommon  artifice  should 
be  resorted  to  by  himself  and  Col.  Burr,  some  pro 
found  collusion  made  use  of,  his  lips  would  be  sealed  and 
£iis  hand  arrested. 

But  Mr.  Ogden,  says  Dr.  Irving,  "  Expressed  his  readi 
ness  to  speak  on  the  subject  ofthe  negociatiation  if  request 
ed  by  any  person  whom  he  should  consider  ivorthy  of  an  an- 
swer"  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  Mr.  Ogden  would 
consider  any  person  unworthy  of  an  answer  who  should 


(    99    ) 

confine  him  too  cbscly  to  the  point.  Accordingly  the 
friends  of  Mr.  Burr,  to  whom  Mr»  Ogclen  expressed  his 
readiness,  conveyed  the  expression  of  it  to  Dr.  Irving 
-who,  in  conformity  to  it,  wrote  his  memorable'letter.  We 
find  this  arrangement  recognized  and  approbated,  in  Mr. 
Ogden's  answer  to  Dr.  Irving,  in  the  following  terms. 

"  I  have  no  objection,"  says  he,  "To  reply  to  an  en 
quiry  which  comes  in  the  shape  of  that  contained  in  your 
letter,  and  from  a  person  of  YOUR  standing  in  society." 
Every  thing  here  is  quite  agreeable  ;  the  shape  of  the  en 
quiry,  as  well  as  the  person  who  penned  it  1  The  arrange 
ment,  therefore,  was  complete  in  all  its  parts  although  Dr. 
Irving  is  altogether  ignorant  of  the  person  of  Mr.  Ogden  I 

From  all  these  circumstances  the  reader  will  determine 

whether  there  was  not  a  good  understanding  between  the 

parties  before  the  two  letters  were  written,  and  an  union 

,       of  action  between   COL.  BURR,  GENERAL  HAMILTON, 

Mr.  HOFFMAN,  the  NEGOCIATQR,  and  DJR.  IRVING  ? 

Having  evinced  the  futility  of  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Og 
den's  letters  we  might  rest  satisfied  and  say  hitherto  have 
•we  gone  and  we  need  not  go  further.  Lest,  however, 
doubts  should  remain  in  the  minds  of  reasonable  men  con 
cerning  Mr.  Burr's  negociation  with  Mr.  Ogden,  as  stated 
in  our  eighth  letter,  we  proceed  to.  corroborate  what  w& 
therein  advanced.. 


(     100     ) 

In  that  letter  we  were  not  authorized  to  designate  Gen. 
Hamilton  by  name  as  the  "  High  federal  character" 
mentioned  in  the  one  included  in  it  dated  "  Washington 
January  29th,  1801,"  detailing  the  propositions  tender, 
ed  to  Mr.  Burr  and  the  answers  given  by  him  to  Mr. 
Ogden.  We  are  now,  however,  authorized  to  say  that 
GEN.  HAMILTON  is  that  "  High  federal  character."  On 
this  subject  we  have  been  favored  with  the  following  let- 
ley,  to  wit,. 

LETTER  No.   L 

CIT*  of  WASHINGTON,  IBth  Dec.  1802. 
f*  Gentlemen^ 

"  There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  Gen.  Hamilton  some 
time  in  January,  1801,  communicated  to  a  federal  mem 
ber  of  Congress  at  Washington,  that  an  application  was 
made  to  Mr.  Burr,  by  a  federal  gentleman  (who  was  au 
thorized  by  some  of  the  leading  federalists  at  Washington) 
to  know  what  plan  of  policy  he  would  pursue  if  elected  to 
the  Presidency  by  the  aid  of  the  federal  party,  and  what 
assistance  he  could  render  to  accomplish  this  object  ? 
that  Mr.  Burr  declined  entering  into  any  specific  terms, 
mentioned  the  name  of  a  friend  who  would  be  more  ex 
plicit,  and  declared  that  there  were  strong  reasons  to  sup 
pose  that  Tennessee  and  New- York  would  relinquish  Mr. 
Jefferson  on  the  second  ballot,  and  probably  that 
Jersey  might  also  concur, 


(M01     ) 

"  I  cannot  pretend  to  give  the  precise  terms  of  Mr; 
Hamilton's  communication,  but  I  know  that  he  wrote  sub- 
stantially  to  the  above  effect  ;  and  the  mode  of  obtaining 
this  information  is  so  perfectly  authentic  and  unexcepti 
onable,  that  I  have  not  the  least  objection  that  you  should 
give  up  my  name  to  Mr.  Hamilton  on  his  application  ; 
and  in  case  of  his  denial,  (which  is  scarcely  possible)  you 
are  at  liberty  to  communicate  it  to  the  public  as  subscribed 
to  this  letter." 

"  I  am,   Gentlemen, 

"  Your  most  obd't  servant." 
"  Messrs.  DENNISTON  £f  CHEETHAM, 

u  Editors  of  the  American  Citizen" 

In  this  letter,  which  imparts  the  substance  of  Gene 
ral   Hamilton's  communication  to   his  friend  at  Wash 
ington,    a  member  of  the   Senate^    Mr.  OGDEN  is  not 
mentioned  as  the  negociator.  It  seems  that  general  Hamil 
ton  studiously  avoided  to  designate  Mr.  Ogden  in  his  letter 
as  the  negociator,  and  satisfied  himself  with  describing 
him  as  \hefederal  gentleman  authorized  by  leading  federal 
ists  at  Washington  to  negotiate  with  Col.  Burr,  presum 
ing,  and  very  justly,  that  the  intimation  would  be  per 
fectly  understood.     There  is,  however,  no  difficulty  on 
,  this  head-,  as  Mr.  Ogden  has  himself  confessed  that  he 
was  the  federal  gentleman  ! 

In  conformity  with  the  permission  contained  in  the 
above  letter,  General  Hamilton  is  informed  that  the  name 


(     102     ) 

of  the  writer  of  it  shall  be  communicated  to  him  on  applied*- 
lion  to  the  Editors,  wt&tfaerj0€r90ft<z%  or  by  writing. 

The  public  are  also  assured  that  if  General  Hamilton, 
failing  to  call  for  the  name  of  the  writer  of  the  above  let 
ter,  should  publicly  deny  that  he  wrote,  some  time  in  Jan 
uary  1801,  a  communication  to  his  friend  at  Washington 
containing  the  substance  of  it,  then  shall  that  name  be 
published  in  the  American  Citizen.  The  Editor  considers 
himself  fully  and  unequivocally  pledged  to  the  public  to 
perform  these  promises. 

It  may,  however,  be  objected  that  although  General 
!Hamiltoirwrote  the  letter  mentioned  in  the  one  above, 
specifying  the  conditions  proposed  to  Mr.  Burr,  and  the 
answers  received  from  him  by  Mr.  Ogden,  yet  as  this 
gentleman  has  denied  that  Mr.  Burr  agreed  to  terms — 
agreed  to  terms  !  how  laughable  '. — it  is  probable  that  he 

wrote  it  on  no  better  foundation  than  mere  surmise. 

Header,  we  will  settle  this  question  to  thy  satisfaction ; 
we  will  lay  before  thee  testimony,  which  no  reasonable 
man  can  reject,  to  prove  that  Mr.  OGDEN  is  the  man — 
yes,  that  Mr.  Ogden  is  himself  the  man  who,  notwith 
standing  the  dishonorable  evasions  contained  in  his  letter 
to  Dr.  Irving — communicated  to  General  Hamilton  the 
propositions  he  had  submitted  to  Col.  Burr,  and  the 
answers  received  from  him. 

The  following  letter  is  from  the  gentleman  who  com- 
'Hwnicated  feo  us  the  one-  contained  in  our  eighth,  dated 


<     103     ) 

fc  Washington,  January  29th,  1801,"  giving  a  summary 
account  of  Mr.  Ogden's  negociation  with  Col.  Burr,  asl 
stated  in  the  letter  written  by  General  Hamilton  to  a  Se 
nator  at  the  seat  of  government. 

LETTER  No.  IL 
"  New- York,  llth  December,  1802. 
u  The  following  are  substantially  if  not  verbally  the 
contents  of  Gen.  Hamilton's  letter,  written  to  a  federal 
gentleman  and  an  influential  member  of  Congress,  in 
January,  1801,  as  far  as  relates  to  Mr.  David  A.  Ogdeu'* 
interview  with  Mr.  Burr,"  to  wit; 

"  A  friend  of  ours,  who  lately  returned  from  Washing 
ton,  was  intrusted  by  some  leading  members  of  Congress 
of  our  party,  to  have  a  conference  with  Col.  Burr,  for 
the  purpose  of  ascertaining  two  things ;  First,  What  would 
be  the  conduct  he  would  observe  if  elected  by  our  means' 
in  respect  to  certain  cardinal  points  of  Federal  policy? 
Second,  What  co-operation  and  aid  he  could  and  would?' 
afford  towards  procuring  success  to  his  ovyn  election  2" 

"  He  accordingly  made  the  communication  to  Co!. 
Burr,  and  as  he  informed  me,  vras  answered  by  him  in 
substance,  that  as  to  the  first  point,  it  would  not  be  pro 
per  or  expedient  to  enter  into  explanation." 

"  That  as  to  the  second  point,  there  was  good  reasou. 
to  expect  that  New- York  said  Tennessee,  on  a  second. 


(     104     ) 

ballot,  would  vote  for  him,  and  New-Jersey  might  per 
haps  do  the  same.'5 

u  In  that  or  a  subsequent  conference  he  referred  to 
******  ********#*?  ashis  confidential  friend 
for  further  explanation.  This  gentleman  leaves  New- 
York  in  a  few  days  for  Washington." 

"  Gentlemen, 

"  I  have  received  the  fullest  and  most  satisfactory 
proof  that  General  Hamilton,  in  January  preceding  the 
late  Presidential  election  by  the  Hquse  of  Representa 
tives,  wrote  a  letter  to  an  influential  member  of  Congress 
in  the  Federal  interest  to  the  effect  above  stated.  The 
evidence  within  my  controul  is  such  as  will  enable  me  to 
establish  the  fact  most  clearly,  even  should  it  become  the 
subject  of  a  judicial  examination." 

tc  You  are  at  perfect  liberty  to  give  my  name  to  the 
public  if  General  Hamilton  denies  it,  which,  from  his 
character  and  situation  in  life,  I  believe  to  be  impossible  ; 
or  if  that  gentleman  calls  upon  you  for  the  source  of  your 
information,  I  authorize-  you  to  give  it  to  him  without 
hesitation  or  reserve." 

"  I  am,  Gentlemen,  your  most  ob'dt." 
a  Messrs.  DENNISTON  &?  CHEETHAM, 

"  Editors  of  the  American  Citizen" 

Agreeably  to  the  authorization  contained  in  the  above 
letter,  the  name  of  the  -writer  of  it  shall,  be  communicated  to 


General  Hamilton  on  application  by  him  to  the  Editor  for 
that  purpose^  whether  personally  or  by  letter. 

It  shall  also,  according  to  the  same  authority,  be  laid 
before  the  public  in  case  General  Hamilton  denies  that 
he  wrote  the  letter  of  which  the  above  is  an  extract. 

In  the  above  letter  the  propositions  of  Mr.  Ogden  and 
the  answers  given  thereto  by  Mr.  Burr,  as  stated  in  our 
eighth,  are  specifically  enumerated.  General  Hamilton, 
with  great  perspicuity,  details  two  propositions  submitted 
by  Mr.  Ogden  to  Mr.  Burr  and  the  answers  received 
from  him ;  to  wit,  first,  "  What  would  be  the  conduct 
he  would  observe  if  elected  by  our  means  ( i.  e.  by  the 
means  of  the  federalists)  in  respect  to  certain  cardinal 
points  of  federal  policy  ?  Second.  What  co-operation, 
and  aid  he  could  and  would  afford  toward  procuring  suc 
cess  to  his  own  election  ?" 

To  which  Mr.  Burr  answered  "  That  as  to  the  frst 
point,  it  would  not  be  proper,  or  expedient  to  enter  into 
explanation" 

"  That  as  to  the  second  point  there  was  good  reason  to 
expect  that  New- York  and  Tenjiessee  on  a  second  ballot 
would  vote  for  him,  and  New-Jersey  might  perhaps  de 
the  same." 

Q 


(     105     ) 

"Such  are  the  questions  put  by  Mr.  Ogdento  Col.  Burr, 
and  the  replies  of  Mr.  Burr  to  Mr.  Ogden. 

And  who  communicated  these  questions  and  answers 
to  General  Hamilton?  It  is  true  General  Hamilton  does 
not  in  his  letter  mention  Mr.  Ogden  as  the  negociator; 
he  simply  says  a  friend  ^ouiis  who  lately  returned  from 
Washington  was  entrusted  by  some  leading  members  of 
Congress  of  OUR  party  to  have  a  conference  with  Col.  Burr 
for  the  purpose,  &?c.  Mr.  Ogden  has,  however,  acknow 
ledged  that  he  was  that  friend ;  that  he  was  the  negociator; 
so  that  on  this  subject  there  is  no  room  for  cavilling. 

General  Hamilton  then  says  "  HE  (that  is,  Mr.  Ogden") 
accordingly  made  the  communication  to  Col.  Burr,  AND 
AS  HE  INFORMED  ME  was  answered  by  him  in 
substance." 

"  That  as  to  the  frst  point,  it  would  not  be  proper  or 
expedient  to  enter  into  explanation. 

"  That  as  to  the  second  point  there  was  good  reason  to 
expect  that  New-York  and  Tennessee  on  a  second  ballot 
would  vote  for  him,  and  New-Jersey  might  do  the  same." 

It  then  appears  that  Mr.  Ogden  communicated  those  facts 
to  General  Hamilton,  who  accordingly  forwarded  them  by- 
letter  to  one  of  those  leading  federal  members  of  Congress 
who  had  authorized  Mr,  Ogden  when  at  Washington  to 


have  a  conference  with  Col.  Burr  for  the  purpose  already 
mentioned.  And  yet,  says  Mr.  Ogden,  in  his  evasive  reply 
to  the  quibbling  letter  of  Dr.  Irving,  Mr.  Burr  did  neither 
propose  nor  agree  to  terms  /"  The  artfulness  of  Mr.  Og- 
den's  letter  exempts  him  from  the  imputation  of  palpable  un 
truth;  for  it  is  obviously  true,  as  he  says,  that  Mr.  Burr 
did  not  agree  to  terms  although  it  is  not  less  so  that  he  enter • 
edfulhj  into  Mr.  Ogderfs  views.  While  therefore  it  is  ap 
parent  that  Mr.  Ogden,  in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving,  has 
been  guilty  of  an  attempt  to  deceive  the  public  by  unwor 
thy  subterfuge,  we  cannot  strictly  say  that  he  justly  lies 
under  the  imputation  of  fcdshood. 

General  Hamilton-. says-  in  his  letter,  an  extract  of 
which  is  inserted  above,  that  Mr.  Ogden  communicated 
to  him  the  negociation  as  stated  in  it ;  if  Mr.  Ogden  did 
not,  General  Hamilton  has  told  an  untruth ;  if  he  did 
then  does  Mr.  Ogden  stand  convicted  before  the  public 
of  prevarication.  General  Hamilton  and  Mr.  Ogden  may 
settle  the  point  between  them  I  . 

Again.  Mr.  Ogden  in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving  assures 
that  he  had  only  one  interview  with  Col.  Burr.  General 
Hamilton  on  the  authority  of  Mr.  Ogden  says,  in  the  above 
extract  from  his  letter,  which  see,  that  "  In  that  or  a  sub 
sequent  conference  he  [Mr.  Burr,]  referred  to 
as  his  confidential  friend  for  further  explanation.  This 
gentleman  leaves  New- York  jjn  a  few  days  for  Washing 
ton."  Here  General  Hamilton  plainly  enough  states  that 


Mr.  Ogden  had  two  conferences  with  Col.  Burr,  and 
this  information  he  tells  us  was  communicated  to  him  by 
Mr.  Ogden  himself  ;  and  yet  he  says  in  his  letter  to  Dr. 
Irving  that  he  had  only  one  ! 

Let  us  here  repeat  that  if  General  Hamilton's  infor 
mation  is  to  two  interviews,  is  true,  that  part  of  Mr.  Og- 
den's  letter  to  Dr.  Irving  where  he  says  he  had  only  one, 
is  not  so.  But  as  General  Hamilton  expressly  relates  that 
he  was  told  by  Mr.  Ogden  himself  that  he  had  two  confer 
ences  with  Col.  Burr,  and  as  it  is  evident  that  Mr.  Ogden 
in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Irving  is  guilty  of  gross  prevarication, 
those  who  know  the  two  persons  will  find  no  difficulty  in 
determining  which  is  most  entitled  to  belief  I 

Let  us  now  bestow  a  few  moment's  consideration  on 
the  propositions  of  the  negociator  and  the  answers  given 
by  Mr.  Burr  thereto. 

The  first  proposition  is  in  these  words,  viz. 

"  What  would  be  the  conduct  he  [Mr.  Burr]  would 
observe  if  elected  by  means  of  the  federalists  in  respect 
to  certain  cardinal  points  of  federal  policy  ? 

To  which  Mr.  Burr  gives  this  answer.  "  That  as  to 
this  point  it  would  not  be  proper  or  expedient  \Q  enter  into 


(     109    ) 

Is  there  aught  of  rejection  contained  in  this  mild  an 
swer  ?  certainly  not.  And  why  would  it  not  be  proper 
to  enter  into  explanation  ?  Because  the  proposition  was  re 
plete  with  treason,  not  indeed  in  legal  contemplation,  but 
as  it  regarded  the  audible  and  unequivocal  expression  of 
the  public  will  in  favour  of  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferson. 
The  term,/?rc^er,here  expressed  is  used  in  a  peculiar  sense. 
It  is  evidently  not  meant  to  convey  an  idea  of  the  im 
propriety  of  the  proposition  abstractly  considered,  but  to 
shew  that,  viewing  the  relative  situation  of  the  two  par 
ties,  the  clearly  expressed  opinion  of  the  union  in  favour 
of  Mr.  Jefferson,  the  affection  which  the  people  had  sup 
posed  Mr.  Burr  felt  to  the  republican  party,  and  the 
singularity  of  going  into  minutiae  on  such  a  proposition, 
it  would  not  be  proper  to  enter  into  explanation. 

Neither  would  it  be  necessary  to  an  understanding  be 
tween  the  two  contracting  parties  that  they  should  enter 
into  explanation,  since  they  might  fully  comprehend  each 
other's  views,  and  mutually  unite  in  them,  as  well  with 
out  explanation  as  with  it.  General  expressions,  of  as 
surances  in  so  delicate  a  transaction  would  be  sufficient. 

Nor  would  it,  says  Mr.  Burr,  be  expedient  to  enter  into 
explanation.  How  emphatically  the  term  expedient  is  here 
used !  It  would  not  be  expedient  because  in  so  singular 
an  act  it  is  the  business  of  a  crafty  politician  to  manage 
so  as  to  guard  against  every  possible  accident,  that  he 
may  ultimately  elude  detection. 


The  word  explanation  in  such  a  transaction-  is  simply- 
used  to  distinguish  between  that  generality  of  expression 
by  which  bargains  of  the  nature  of  the  one  entered  into , 
between  Mr.  Burr  and  Mr.  Ogden  may  be  mutually  con 
cluded  to  the  satisfaction  of  both,  and  the  refined  specif^ 
cation  of  things  which,  in  a  treacherous  act,  may  event 
ually  lead  to  a  developement  of  it. 

His  rrfcrring  the  negociator  to  his  confidential  friend : 
for  further  explanation^  demonstrates  that  his  declining 
to  enter  into  explanation  with  Mr.  Ogden  was  an  act 
of  precaution  not  of  Integrity.  It  speaks  home  to  the 
understanding  and  informs  it  most  significantly  that  Mr. 
Burr  was  perfectly  willing  that  his  friend  in  whom 
he  had  confidence  should  explain  for  him  ;  but  that  he  was 
fearful  of  explaining  himself  lest  the  scheme  eventually 
fail,  and  his  explanation  furnish  conclusive  proof  of  his  want 
of  faith  to  the  party  to  whom  he  had  pretended  attachment, 
and  of  his  utter  disregard  of  public  and  private  virtue. 

Mr.  Burr  only  objects  to  entering  into  explanation, 
This  by  no  means  repudiates  the  idea  of  treating  with 
Mr.  Ogden  in  general  terms,  and  of  imparting  such  a 
plain  indication  of  his  assent  to  the  overtures  of  the 
negociator  as  could  neither  be  mistaken  nor  dissatisfac 
tory. 

Accordingly,  to  the  second  proposition  of  the  negocia- 
tcr,  namely,  "  What  co-operation  and  aid  he?  Mr.  Burr, 


{  111  ) 

could  and  would  afford  towards  procuring  success  to  bis 
own  election  ?"  He  answers,  "  That  as  to  this  point, 
there  was  good  reason  to  expect  that  New- York  and  Ten 
nessee  on  a  second  ballot  would  vote  for  him,  and  New- 
Jersey  might  perhaps  do  the  same." 

This  answer  leaves  us  not  at  liberty  to  doubt.  It 
imports  full  assent  to  the  views  of  the  negociator.  A 
more  ample  and  emphatic  acquiescence  could  not  have 
been  given.  It  holds  out  the  most  flattering  encourage 
ment.  It  does  more  :  it  points  to  the  very  states  which 
he  says  he  has  good  reasons  to  expect  will  vote  for  him  on 
a  second  ballot.  It  designates  the  state  of  New- York  in 
which  his  confidential  friend  resided,  and  of  which  he 
was  a  representative.  It  pointed  out  New- Jersey  where 
himself  and  his  friend  Mr.  Senator  Dayton  had  already 
commenced  their  intrigues. 

These  two  states  were  sufficient  for  his  purpose  ;  and 
if  they  had  given  way,  iu  all  probability  Tennessee,  ac 
cording  to  Mr.  Burr's  calculation,  would  have  followed. 
The  representation  of  the  states  in  the  House  stpod  thus, 
eight  for  Mr.  Jefferson,  six  for  Mr.  Burr,  and  two  divided' 
If  therefore  Mr.  Burr's  intrigues  in  New-York  and  New- 
Jersey  had  been  as  successful  as  he  had  good  reason  to  ex 
pect;  if  the  flattering  prospects  he  held  out  to  Mr.  Ogden 
of  these  two  states  receding  from  Mr.  Jefferson  on  a  se 
cond  ballot  and  voting  for  himself,  had  been  realized, 
alas  I  he  would  have  been  President  of  the  United  States  ! 


f.    112     ) 

\Ve  were  on  the  brink  of  a  precipk^e  we  saw  not;  but 
thank  God  we  are  saved. 

It  may  be  said  by  the  blind  and  infatuated  partizans  of 
Mr.  Burr,  that  General  Hamilton  did  not  write  the  letter 
of  which  communication  No.  1  herein  inserted  is  the 
substance,  and  No.  2  an  extract.  The  grounds  of  this 
objection  will  perhaps  be  our  with-holding  the  names  of 
the  two  gentlemen  who  have  done  us  the  distinguished 
honour  of  placing  them  in  our  hands.  But  this  objection 
will  appear  futile  when  it  is  considered  that  we  are  pledged 
to  communicate  them  to  General  Hamilton,  if  called  for 
by  him,  or,  if  he  publicly  disavows  the  letter,  that  we 
are  equally  committed  to  our  fellow  citizens  to  publish 
them.  Idle  curiosity  may  wish  to  know  the  gentlemen, 
but  delicacy  forbids  the  mention  of  them  unless  imperi 
ous  circumstances  should  call  for  it ;  in  either  of  the  two 
cases  stated  their  names  shall  be  given  up ;  in  no  other 
can  they  be,  nor  is  it  necessary  they  should. 

It  may  also  be  said  that  General  Hamilton,  conscious 
that  he  wrote  the  letter  in  question  will  neither  disavow  it 
nor  call  on  the  Editors  for  the  writers  of  the  two  commu 
nications.  This  will  be  as  good  negative  evidence  as  can 
well  be  furnished  that  he  wrote  it,  and  on  which  the  pub 
lic  migtit  rest  satisfied.  There  is,  however,  a  remedy  for 
the  evil  which,  although  not  in  our  possession,  is  cer 
tainly  in  that  of  thousands  of  our  citizens,  particularly  of 


Dr.  Irving.  And  as  we  wish  the  public  to  be  in  posses 
sion  of  all  proper  information  on  this  momentous  sub 
ject,  we  will  take  the  liberty  to  point  it  out. 

Dr.  Irving  is  a  gentleman  of  "  Respectable  standing  in 
society,"  he  is  acknowledged  to  be  so  by  the  negociator 
himself,  who  is  an  honorable  man  I  Now  suppose  Dr. 
Irving,  or  any  other  person  of  equal  "  Standing"  should 
write  to  General  Hamilton  and  ask  him  whether  he  penned 
the  letter  in  question  ?  We  should,  however,  prefer  Dr. 
Irving  because  he  is  actively  engaged  for  Mr.  Burr,  and 
has  been  employed  in  this  species  of  enquiry.  General 
Hamilton  could  not  refuse  him  an  answer  since  Mr.  Ogdert 
has  recognized  and  proclaimed  his  respectable  standing  in 
society.  We  ask  Dr.  Irving,  therefore,  to  write  to  Gen 
eral  Hamilton  requesting  information,  not  about  terms 
agreed  upon,  charges,  and  points  above  stated^  but  whether 
he  penned  the  letter  in  question,  repeating  its  contents  as 
detailed  in  letter  No.  2,  and  whether  he  derived  his  in 
formation  from  Mr.  Ogden  ?  If  to  such  an  enquiry  Gen 
eral  Hamilton  says  he  did  not  write  it,  and  that  too  on  the 
authority  of  Mr.  Ogclen,  then  will  we  publish  the  names 
of  the  two  gentlemen  who  communicated  to  us  the 
above  letters,  numbered  1  and  2.  This  we  hope  the  pub 
lic  will  deem  sufficient  on  our  part.  The  two  gentlemen 
are  pre-eminent  in  republicanism,  in  rank,  in  integrity, 
and  ia  honour. 


C 

In  confirmation,  however,  if  confirmation  be  necessary, 
of  the  propositions  of  Mr.  Ogden  and  the  answers  of 
Col.  Burr,  as  stated  in  the  communications  number  1 
and  2,  it  is  proper  to  say,  that  the  Hon.  Judge  Living 
ston  of  this  city,  a  gentleman  whose  intelligence  and  in 
tegrity  will  not  be  questioned,  repeated,  in  a  conversation 
with  the  Editors,  and  authorized  them  to  state,  the 
following  facts  ;  namely,  that  General  Hamilton  did, 
at  the  Hotel  in  Albany,  and  in  the  company  of  gentlemen 
of  both  parties,  explicitly  declare,  in  February  1801,  im 
mediately  after  Mr.  Ogderfs  negotiation,  that  Burr  had 
negotiated  or  intrigued  with  a  federal  gentleman  for  the 
Presidency  [the  Judge  is  not  certain  which  term  he  made 
use  of]  and  that  he  told  the  negotiator,  or  the  person  with 
whom  he  had  intrigued,  that  after  the  second  ballot 
in  the  House,  New-York  and  New-Jersey  would  re 
linquish  Mr.  Jefferson  and  vote  for  him  I  It  was  ob 
served  by  some  One  in  company  that  it  was  indiscreet 
for  General  Hamilton  to  make  such  a  declaration  in  such, 
a  company ;  to  which  the  General  replied  u  Not  at  all,  I 
can  prove  it  in  a  court  of  justice  I"  This  declaration  Judge 
Livingston,  a  few  days  after  it  was  made  by  General 
Hamilton,  communicated  to  the  Hon.  De  Witt  Clinton. 
We  repeat  that  we  were  some  time  since  authorized  by 
Judge  Livingston  to  make  this  statement,  and  those  who 
doubt  it  arc  referred  to  him  for  its  verification. 


In  conformity  with  the  answer  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the 
second  proposition  of  Mr.  Ogtlen,  viz.  that  after  the  se 
cond  ballot  in  the  House  of  Representatives  New- York 
and  New-Jersey  would  relinquish  Mr,  Jefferson  and  vote 
for  him,  Mr.  Burr  prosecuted  with  vigour  his  plans  of 
intrigue  t©  induce  this  fatal  event.  One  of  his  confidential 
agents,  a  man  devoted  to  the  furtherance  of  these  ob 
jects,  was  Mr.  William  P.  Van  Ness  of  this  city.  Al 
though  this  person  is  not  blessed  with  more  than  a  com 
mon  understanding,  yet  he  was  well  adapted  to  the  end  ; 
he  has  a  brooding,  plotting  mind,  and  was  well  fitted  for 
the  work.  He  married  a  lady  of  fortune  ;  he  \spfciiniarily 
connected  with  Col.  Burr  ;  rue  is  a  surety  in  his  memor 
able  negotiation  with  the  Manhattan  Company,  of  which 
we  a  few  days  since  laid  a  statement  before  the  public. 

Mir.  Ogden  went,  to  Washington  on  the  27th  day  of 
December  1800,  aad  after  being  clothed,  by  leading  fede 
ralists  there,  with  diplomatic  powers  returned  to  this  city : 
the  negotiation  was  completed  about  the  15th.  To  in 
duce  New- York  and  New-Jersey  to  relinquish  Mr.  Jef 
ferson  on  a  second  ballot  and  vote  for  him,  was  a  pri 
mary  object  with  Mr.  Burr.  With  respect  to  New- 
York  he  had  already  made  arrangements  011  which  he 
founded  sanguine  calculations  ;  nothing,  therefore,  was 
necessary  but  a  rigid  perseverance  in  the  execution  of 
them.  In  regard  to  New-Jersey,  although  himself  and 
his  friend,  Senator  Dayton,  had  tampered  with  a  repi$* 


llcan  representative  of  that  state,  something  more  effici 
ent,  influence  more  powerful,  was  to  be  employed.  To 
carry  his  projects  the  more  securely  into  execution  in 
respect  to  these  two  states,  Mr.  Burr  went  to  Albany, 
where,  he  imagined,  his  presence  would  lull  suspicion  if 
any  existed :  the  legislature  was  about  to  be  in  session. 
Mr.  Burr  and  his  friend  Van  Ness  applied  to  the  Albany 
stage  office  for  seats  that  they  might  go  together,  but  as 
both  could  not  be  accommodated,  Mr.  Burr  left  this 
city  in  his' own  carrirge  on  the  21st  of  January  ;  Mr- 
Van  Ness  followed  him  on  the  22d,  and  Mr.  Swartwout 
in  a  day  or  two  after. 

The  following  letter,  with  which  we  have  been  oblig 
ingly  favoured  by  Mr.  Pennington,  a  member  of  the  exe 
cutive  council  of  New-Jersey,  will  shew  most  clearly, 
when  viewed  in  conjunction  with  what  has  been  already 
said,  the  aequiescence  of  Mr.  Burr  in  the  projects  of  the 
negotiator,  and  that  the  means  he  employed  to  carry  them 
into  effect  were  in  perfect  accordance  with  his  answer 
to  the  second  proposition  of  Mr.  Ogden,  to  wit,  that  after 
the  second  ballot  he  had  good  reason  to  expect  that  New- 
York  and  New-Jersey  would  recede  from  Mr.  Jefferson 
and  vote  for  him* 

LETTER  III 

Netv-Torky  December  2£d.  1802. 
"  DEAR  SIR, 

"  By  authority,  which  we  cannot  doubt,  we  have  been 
informed  that  letters  have  been  shewn  to  you,  written  by 


C 

Mr.  John  Swart\vout  of    this  city,    marshal,    and  Mr.- 
William  P.  Van  Ness,  of  the  same  place,    addressed  to 
Mr.  Robert  Williams  of  Poughkeepsie  on  the  subject  of 
the  late  Presidential  election.    We  intend,  shortly,  to  re 
touch  the  subject  of  Mr.   Burr's  negociation  with  Mr. 
Ogden,  and  as  in  doing  so  it  may  be  necessary  to  notice 
those  letters,  and  lay   be  Tore  the   public,    as  far  as  has 
come  to  our  knowledge,  the  substance  of  them,  we  beg 
you  to  favour  us  with  your  impressions  of  their  contents. 
>          u  We  are,  with  unfeigned  respect,  sir, 
u  Your  most  obcTt  serv'ts, 

"  DENNISTON  &  CHEETHAM," 
<c  To  WilUam  S.  Pennington,  Esq. 


LETTER  IV. 

Newark,  27th  Dec.  1802. 
GENTLEMEN, 

It  is  a  thing  that  has  ever  been  very  foreign  from  my 
expectations,  that  any  thing  which  passed  between  Mr. 
Robert  Williams  and  myself,  on  the  subject  to  which  you 
allude,  would  ever  become  a  matter  of  public  investiga 
tion.  In  the  summer  of  1801,  I  mentioned,  without  any 
expectation  of  its  being  again  noticed,  some  facts  res 
pecting  it,  to  a  gentleman  of  respectable  standing  in  your 
state  ;  and  I  understand  that  it  is  through  the  medium  of 
this  gentleman  that  you  have  obtained  your  information. 
Since  what  hath  passed  is  to  be  made  public,  it  is  certain 
ly  beat  that  the  transaction  should  be  stated  with  correct- 


ness.     I  shall  therefore  endeavour  to  do  it  with  as  much 
exactness  as  my  memory  will  enable  me  to. 

In  the  winter  of  1800  and  1801  I  resided  with  my  fa 
mily  at  Poughkeepsie.     The  subject  of  the  Presidential 
election,  as  it  was  natural  it  should  do,  engaged  much 
attention,    and  excited  much  public  anxiety.     For  my 
own  part  I  did  not  think  that  the  federalists  were  sincere 
in  their  attempt  to  make  Mr.  Burr  President,  but  that 
their  plans  were  calculated  to   prevent  Mr.   Jefferson  V 
election  that  they  might  have  a  pretence  for  creating  an 
executive  officer  of  their  own  party  ;  and  thereby  either 
retain  in  their  own  hands  the  executive  power,  or  in  case 
it  was  denied  them,  to  disturb  the  repose  of  the  union. 
Information  received  from  the  eastern  states,  and  especi 
ally   Connecticut,  served  to  strengthen  the  opinion.     I 
therefore  thought  that  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferson  ought 
to  be  persevered  in  as  long  as  there  was  any  probability  of 
success  ;  but  if  the  republicans  were  driven  to  the  alterna 
tive  of  either  electing   Mr.  Burr,    or  of  putting  in  ha 
zard  the  public  tranquillity,  I  thought  as  the  least  of  the 
two  evils  it  would  be  best  to  encounter  the  first.     Under 
this  impression  I  wrote  to  several  of  the  New-Jersey 
members  in  congress,  and  particularly  to  Mr.  Linn,  and 
endeavoured  to  impress  the  opinion  on  their  minds.     I 
was  intimately  acquainted  with  Mr.  Williams  and  in  ha 
bits  of  friendship  .with  him.     He  appeared  to  accord  with 
me  in  sentiment,  .and.  I  have  had  no  reason  to  doubt  h& 


( 

sincerity.  About  this  time,  and  while  Mr.  Burr  was  at 
Albany,  Mr.  Williams  first  shewed  me  a  letter  from  a 
Mr.  Van  Ness  to  him,  dated,  I  think,  at  Albany,  sug 
gesting  the  propriety  of  electing  Mr.  Burr,  rather  than 
have  no  President,  and  at  the  s-ame  time  informing  Mr. 
Williams  that  he  understood  that  a  Mr.  Pennington,  from 
New-Jersey,  resided  at  Poughkeepsie,  who,  it  was  thought, 
had  influence  with  Mr.  Linn,  and  requesting  Mr. 
Williams  to  prevail  on  him  to  write  to  Mr.  Linn  on  the 
subject  and  endeavour  to  bring  him  into  the  measure. 
This,  according  with  my  own  opinion,  encouraged  the 
measure  I  was  pursuing ;  but  I  could  not  conceive  how 
this  Mr.  Van  Ness  should  know  any  thing  of  me,  as  I 
had  no  acquaintance  with  or  knowledge  of  him,  nor  do  I 
now  recollect  his  other  names  ;  but  Mr.  Williams  descri 
bed  him  to  me  as  the  young  gentleman  who  had  lately 
married  a  young  lady  by  the  name,  I  think  of  M'Evers, 
to  whom  Mr.  Daniel  H.  Beize,  late  of  this  town,  de 
ceased,  had  bequeathed  a  very  handsome  legacy.  Shortly 
after  this,  I  think  the  next  day,  Mr.  Williams  either 
shewed  to  me,  or  read  to  me  a  letter  from  Mr.  John 
Swartwout  of  nearly  the  same  import,  as  that  of  Mr. 
Van  Ness.  Mr.  Swartwout  was  then  attending  the  Le 
gislature  at  Albany,  and  as  I  had  some  acquaintance  with 
this  gentleman,  I  thought  the  circumstance  no  way  re 
markable.  I  am  not  certain  that  I  read  the  letter  from 
Mr.  Swartwout,  and  rather  think  Mr.  Williams  read  the 
letter  to  me  or  part  of  it,  and  informed  me  that  it  was 


from  Mr.  Swartwout.  Some  short  time  after  this  I  was  on 
an  evening  at  the  hotel  in  Poughkeepsie  in  company  with 
Mr.  Williams,  when  the  northern  mail  arrived  ;  this  was 
the  last  mail  expected  to  reach  Washington  before  the 
day  of  election.     We   went  together  to    the  post-office. 
Mr.  Williams  received  a  letter  and  after  we   returned  to 
the  hotel,  and  he  had  read  it,  he  handed  it  to  me  to  read. 
This  was  another  letter  from  Mr.  Van  Ness.     In  this 
letter  Mr.  Van  Ness  developed  the  views  of  himself,  and 
I  think  he  said  of  the  republicans  at  Albany,  which  were 
to  promote  Mr.  Burr's  election  at  all  events.     In  this  I 
think  he  calculated  on  Mr.  Livingston  and  Mr.  Bailey  of 
New- York,  and   Mr.  Linn  of  New- Jersey,  and  urged 
Mr.  Williams  to  write  all  night  to  his  friends  in  Congress, 
in  order  to  promote  the  measure,  informing  that  he,  Mr. 
Van  Ness,  would  do,  or  had  done  the  same  ;  there  was 
something  in  the  letter  about  Mr.  Van  Ness's  coming  to 
Kinderkook  or  lower  down,  which  I  do  not  particularly 
remember.     This  is  the  substance  of  the  letter  as  well  as 
I  can,  after  this  distance  of    time,  recollect.     After  I 
had  read  the  letter,    Mr.   Williams   asked  me  what  I 
thought  of  it,  to  which  I  replied,  that  I  thought  the 
thing  altogether  wrong  and  improper,  and  that  it  ought 
not  to  be  countenanced,  as  it  disclosed  an  evident  design 
to  obtain  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr,  in  preference  to  Mr. 
Jefferson.     Mr.  Williams  assented  to  the  truth  of  my 
observations,   and  declared  that  he  would  not  write  a 
single  letter  on  the  subject,  nor  trouble  himself  further 
about  it. 


C     121     ) 

Mr.  Williams  can  afford  you  a  more  substantial  account 
of  these  transactions  than  I  can  j  perhaps  he  has  preserved 
die  letters.  I  would  therefore  advise  you  to  apply  to 
him,  should  you  think  the  matter  of  sufficient  impor 
tance  to  justify  the  trouble  of  the  application. 
I  am,  with  respect, 

Your  very  humble  serv't, 
WILLIAM  S.  PENNINGTON. 
To  Messrs.  Dennlston  &?  Chcetham* 


It  would  be  well  for  the  reader  to  analyze  Mr.  Pen- 
nington's  letter,  for  the  more  it  is  examined  the  more 
iniquitous  the  conduct  of  Messrs.  Burr,  Van  Ness,  and 
Swartwout  will  appear. 

It  was  necessary  for  Mr.  Burr  to  have  agents  to  carry 
his  schemes  into  execution,  and  accordingly  we  find  that 
Mr.  Van  Ness  and  Mr.  Swartwout,  who  are  perfectly  in 
his  confidence,  were,  amongst  others,  chosen  in  this  state. 

The  plans  pursued  by  Mr.  Swartwout  and  Mr.  Van 
Ness  as  represented  in  Mr.  Pennington's  letter,  were 
master-strokes  of  intrigue^  and  authorize  the  suspicion 
that  Mr.  Burr  was  the  projector  of  them.  Mr.  Van  Ness 
writes,  it  is  believed,  from  Albany,  where  Mr.  Burr  then 
was,  to  Mr.  Williams,  suggesting  the  propriety  of  ac 
quiescing  in  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  rather  than  have 

Q 


(     122     ) 

320  President. — The  next  day,  or  shortly  after,  Mr.  Swart" 
wout  writes  to  the  same  gentleman,  from  the  same  place, 
and  to  the  same  effect  I  This,  we  repeat,  was  a  master 
stroke  of  intrigue  j  for  it  is  evident  that  those  letters  were 
simply  designed  to  prepare 'the  way  for  the  reception- 
of  the  second  from  Mr.  Van  Ness  in  which  he  urges 
the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  at  all  events  !  The  intriguers 
foresaw  that  such  a  letter,  without  the  previous  ones  from. 
Mr.  Swartwout  and  Mr.  Van  Ness,  must  shock  Mr. 
Williams  extremely,  and  indeed  notwithstanding  the  an 
terior  letters^  it  appears  to  have  done  so. 

But  the  grand  object  of  thus  writing  to  Mr.  Williams 
was  to  induce  him  to  prevail  on  Mr.  Pennington  to  vise 
his  influence  with  Mr.  Linn,  one  of  the  Republican  Re 
presentatives  of  New-Jersey,  on  the  subject,  that  is,  as 
Mr.  Van  Ness  expressed  himself  in  his  letter  to  Mr. 
Williams,  to  elect  Mr.  Burr  at  all  events  !  It  appears  that 
neither  Mr.  Swartwout  nor  Mr.  Van  Ness  were  person 
ally  acquainted  with  Mr.  Pennington,  and  they  were 
therefore  constrained  to  apply  to  an  intermediate  person 
to  prevail  on  Mr.  Linn,  to  vote  for  the  election  of  Mr* 
Burr  at  all  events  / 

And  why  was  this  influence  to  be  employed  upon  Mr. 
Linn  ?  Is  the  question  difficult  to  solve  ?  Mr.  Bun- 
told  Mr.  Ogden,  in  answer  to  the  second  proposition,  that 
on  a  second  ballot  New-Jersey,  he  had  good  reason  to 


(     123     ) 

expect,  would  relinquish  Mr.  Jefferson  and  vote  for  him? 
Accordingly  influence  had  been  employed  and  was  still  to 
be  empkyed  to  produce  this  relinquishment. 

Influence  had  been  used.  Senator  Dayton,  who  ad 
vanced  Mr.  Burr  twenty  thousand  dollars  on  a  mortgage, 
and  who  is  no-iv  one  of  his  sureties  in  his  money  nego- 
ciation  with  the  Manhattan  Company,  actually  offered, 
before  the  ballotting  commenced  in  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives,  to  make  Mr.  Linn  governor  of  Neiv-J  ersey  in, 
case  he  would  relinquish  Mr.  Jefferson  and  vote  for  Mr. 
Burr  !  !  This  attempt  to  alienate  Mr.  Linn  from  his  duty 
was  unsuccessful, 

Mr.  Linn,  however,  was  to  be  assailed  in  favour  of  Mr. 
Burr  by  both  parties.  The  intriguers  were  sure  that  if 
they  could  induce  Mr.  Penningtonto  prevail  on  Mr.  Linn 
to  vote  for  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  at  all  events ,  his  an 
swer  to  Mr.  Ogden,  that  he  had  good  reason  to  expect  that 
New-Jersey  on  a  second  ballot  would  recede  from  Mr. 
Jefferson  and  vote  for  him,  would  be  realized.  But  MR* 
PENNINGTON  could  not  be  convened  into  an  instrument 
to  carry  into  effect  the  iniquitous  plot.  He  no  sooner 
saw  the  design,  apparent  in  the  letter  of  Mr.  Van  Ness, 
than  it  drew  from  him  an  unfeigned  reprobation. 

Mark  the  zeal  with  which  Mr.  Van  Ness  enters  into 
the  service  of  Mr.  Burr!    "  In  this  lettei",  say 


C     124     ) 

Pennington,  "  Mr.  Van  Ness  developed  the  views  of 
himself,  and  I  think  he  said,  of  the  republicans  at  Al 
bany,  which  were  to  promote  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr 
at  all  events"  Merciful  God !  Who  but  one  abandoned 
to  all  wickedness,  devoid  of  all  shame,  of  public  virtue 
and  private  honour,  could  have  written  such  a  letter  ? 
But  he  was  not  contented  with  writing  this  letter. — "  He, 
urged  Mr.  Williams,"  says  Mr.  Pennington  "  to  write 
all  night  to  his  friends  in  Congress  in  order  to  promote 
the  measure,  informing  him,  Mr.  Williams,  that  he,  Mr. 
Van  Ness,  would  do  or  had  done  the  same  I" 

This  letter  then  developed,  according  to  Mr.  Van  Ness, 
the  views  of  the  Republicans  at  Albany,  which  were  to 
elect  Mr.  Burr  at  all  events!  What  a  gross  and  presump 
tuous  untruth!  Under  the  pretext  of  representing  the 
views  of  the  Republicans,  the  very  liberties  of  the  country 
were,  by  a  few  base  intriguers,  put  at  hazard ! 

The  same  pretext  was  set  forth  by  Mr.  Van  Ness  in 
the  letter  which  he  wrote  at  the  same  time  to  Mr.  Edward 
Livingston  then  our  representative.  *This  letter  was 
dated  at  Albany  in  February  1801,  a  little  before  the 
ballotting  in  the  House  of  Representatives  commenced. 
In  it  he  stated  that  the  republicans  were  alarmed  at  the 
aspect  of  affairs,  and  requested  Mr.  Livingston,  as  the 
sense  of  the  Republicans  at  Albany,  [and  by  this  was 
meant  the  sense  of  the  Legislature  then  in  session]  to 


(     125     ) 

recede  from  Mr.  Jefferson,  after  the  frst  ballot,  and 
vote  for  Mr.  Burr!  We  willingly  appeal  to  Mr.  Living 
ston,  although  we  never  conversed  with  him  on  the  sub 
ject,  for  the  truth  of  this  statement  of  the  contents  of  the 
letter. 

It  then  appears  first,  that  the  letters  of  Dr.  Irving  and 
Mr.  Ogclen  touch  not  the  true  points  of  controversy  ;  that, 
in  one  word,  they  are  sheer  deceptions  artfully  contrived 
to  mislead  the  public. 

And  secondly,  That  Mr.  Burr  entered  fully  into  the 
views   of    Mr.    Ogden,     although    he     did  'not    agree 
to   terms !     This   is  evident,     first,    from  the  letter  of 
General  Hamilton,  written,   as  he  states,  on  the  authori 
ty  of  Mr.  Ogden.     Secondly,  from  the  machinations  of 
Messrs.   Burr,  Van  Ness,  Swartwout,  and  Dayton,  to 
induce   New- York    and  New-Jersey  to  relinquish  Mr. 
Jefferson  on  a  second  ballot,  agreeably  to   Mr.  Barr's 
answer  to  the  second  proposition  of  the  negotiator,  to  wit, 
that  he  had  good  reason  to  expect  that  those  two  states 
would   recede   from   Mr.  Jefferson  and  vote   for  him. 
These  are  actions  that  speak  for  themselves,  and  they 
are  proved,  first,  by  the  letter  of  Mr.  Pennington  detail 
ing  the  contents  of  Mr.  Van  Ness's  to  Mr.  Williams  of 
Poughkeepsie  ;  secondly,  by  Mr.  Van  Ness's  letter  to  Mr. 
Edward  Livingston,  thirdly,  by  Mr.  Dayton's  proffer  to 
make  Mr.   Linn  governor  of  New-Jersey  in  case  he 
would  forsake  Mr.  Jefferson  and  vote  for  Col.  Burr,  and 


(     126     ) 

fourthly,  by  the  holding  out  of  the  federalists  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  in  the  full  expectation  that  New- York 
and  New-Jersey  would,  according  to  Mr.  Burr's  answer 
to  the  second  proposition  of  Mr.  Ogden,  desert  Mr. 
Jefferson  and  vote  for  Col.  Burr.  These  facts  speak  too 
audibly  and  eloquently  to  the  senses  to  be  resisted. 

Since  the  Presidential  election  Mr.  Burr  has  manifest 
ed  hostility  to  the  administration  :  his  proceedings  on  the 
Judiciary  question  are  evidence  of  it. 

He  calumniates  the  executive  in  his  private  correspon 
dence  with  his  friends.  The  Editor  could  name  one  of 
them  who  received  from  Col.  Burr  a  letter  written  by 
him  while  at  Washington  during  the  last  session,  in 
which  he  speaks  indecorously  of  the  executive  and 
pointedly  reprobates  his  administration.  While  he 
knozvs  the  fact  he  is  not  at  liberty  to  mention  the  name 
of  the  person  to  whom  the  letter  was  written. 

The  immediate  friends  of  Col.  Burr  speak  contempt 
uously  of  the  executive  and  of  his  administration. 

Between  the  Morning  Chronicle,  a  paper  devoted  to 
their  views,  the  Evening  Post,  under  the  immediate  in 
fluence  of  General  Hamilton,  and  the  New- York  Gazette, 
principally  controuled  by  Dr.  Linn  of  this  city,  who 


C 

is  notoriously  guided  by  General  Hamilton,  there  is  a 
perfect  accordance  of  action  in  every  thing  that  relates  to 
the  Vice-President. 

Seeing  these  things,  it  is  high  time  for  the  friends  of 
the  administration  ;  for  those  who  are  inimical  to  usurpa 
tion,  whether  by  force  or  by  intrigue  y  to  unite  in  tlae 
support  of  the  one,  and  in  disapprobation  of  the  other. 
Circumstances  render  it  necessary  that  we  should  view 
the  advocates  of  Mr.  Burr  as  federalists.,  and  in  our 
intercourse  with  them  to  treat  them  accordingly. 


(     128     ) 

A  P  P  END  IX. 


TO  THE  PUBLIC. 

THE  false  colouring  given  by  the  relation  of  one  William 
S.  Pennington,  in  a  letter  to  Denniston  and  Cheetham,  which 
appeared  in  the  American  Citizen  of  the  22d  inst.  and  their 
subsequent  malicious  remarks,  oblige  me  once  more  to  ask 
pardon  for  obtruding  myself  on  the  public  attention. 

I  declare,  on  my  honour,  that  I  did  not,  at  any  time  advise 
the  election  of  Mr.  Burr,  as  President  of  the  United  States, 
to  the  exclusion  of  Mr.  Jefferson  ;  nor  did  I  ever  write  to 
any  person  or  persons  to  that  effect :  and  I  hereby  authorize 
Mr.  Robert  Williams  to  publish  any  letter  or  letters  he  may 
have  received  from  me  on  the  subject  of  the  presidential  elec 
tion.  I  am  induced  to  contradict  the  base  slander  of  those 
exclusive  patriots,  by  a  regard  to  truth  only  and  not  from  a 
conviction  that  it  would  have  been  either  dishonourable  to  me 
or  disadvantageous  to  the  country,  or  the  republican  party, 
to  have  promoted  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the  Presiden 
tial  chair. 

JOHN  SWARTWOUT. 

New- York,  Jan.  23,  1803* 


(     129     ) 

TO  JOHN  SWARTWOUT,  Esq. 

MARSHAL. 
SIR, 

Notwithstanding  the  rudeness  of  your  remarks,  we  have 
not  hesitated  for  a  moment  to  give  them  a  place  in  the  CITI. 
ZEN.  It  is  proper  that  an  offender  should  be  heard  where  his 
offence  is  urged  against  him. 

While  patriotism  frowns  upon  your  intrigues,  charity  dis 
poses  us  to  make  allowances  for  the  irritability  of  your  tern, 
per.  Rely  on  it,  sir,  your  passion  injures  no  one  but  your 
self  ;  it  is  neither  calculated  to  convince  nor  conciliate  those 
who  believe  you  not  immaculate  with  regard  to  Mr.  Burr's 
negociation  with  Mr.  Ogden.  To  be  formidable,  whether 
your  political  conduct,  with  respect  to  the  negociation,  has  been 
honourable  or  dishonourable,  it  is  essential  that  you  be  dispas 
sionate  ;  to  convince  your  fellow-citizens  that  you  were  not 
a  subordinate  agent  in  that  alarming  plot,  much  more 
than  your  delusive  and  indecorous  address  to  the  pub. 
lie  is  necessary.  We  would  advise  contrition  for  the  past, 
and,  as  a  pledge  for  the  future,  a  public  renunciation  of  your 
errors  and  political  connections. 

Did  we  perceive  in  your  address  a  disposition  to  repent, 
ance,  we  would  invigorate  your  resolution  to  reform.  But  it 
does  more  than  indicate  a  perverse  and  sullen  determination 
to  persevere  in  error :  we  shall  therefore  proceed  to  exhibit 
its  want  of  candour  and  of  truth. 

R 


(     130     ) 

You  accuse  Mr.  Pennington  of  having  given  "  False  colour 
ing"  to  his  circumspect  relation  of  the  letter  you  wrote  to 
Mr.  Robert  Williams  of  Poughkeepsie,  and  ourselves  of 
having  made  upon  that  relation  "  Malicious  remarks."  You, 
however,  content  yourself  with  making  these  accusations 
without  endeavouring  to  prove  by  argument  or  by  testimony 
cither  the  one  or  the  other.  No  one  could  expect  from  you 
the  former,  the  latter  the  public  have  a  right  to  demand. 

Let  us  examine  the  charge  against  Mr.  Pennington. 

After  Mr.  Pennington  had  stated  that  Mr.  Van  Ness  wrote 
to  Mr.  Williams  "  Suggesting  the  propriety  of  electing  Mr. 
Burr  rather  than  have  no  President,"  he  says  "  Shortly  after 
this,  I  think  the  next  day,  Mr.  Williams  either  shewed  to 
me,  or  read  to  me,  a  letter  from  Mr.  John  Swartwout,  of 
nearly  the  same  import  as  that  of  Mr.  Van  Ness.  Mr. 
Swartwout  was  then  attending  the  Legislature  at  Albany,  and 
as  I  had  some  acquaintance  with  this  gentleman,  I  thought 
the  circumstance  no  way  remarkable.  I  am  not  certain 
that  I  read  the  letter  from  Mr.  Swartwout,  and  rather  think 
Mr.  Williams  read  the  letter  to  me,  or  part  of  it,  and  in. 
formed  me  that  it  was  from  Mr.  Swartwout."  This  is  all 
that  h  said  of  you  in  Mr.  Pennington's  letter,  which 
see. 

Now,  sir,  if  you  wrote  the  letter  in  question,  which  you 
have  not  denied,  nor  will  you,  we  are  of  opinion,  find  it  con 
venient  to  deny,  what  terms  could  Mr.  Pennington  have- 
chosen  more  modest,  more  circumspect  or  less  deserving 
the  epithet  you  have  applied  to  them?  Can  any  reader  but 


yourself  find  "  False  colouring"  in  his  remarks  ?  Have  you,, 
in  truth,  discovered  it?  Or  is  it  not  an  art  dexterously  played 
off,  with  an  intention  to  deceive  the  public  ? 

Mr.  Pennington's  solicitude  to  avoid  mistatement  is  apparent 
in  his  relation  of  the  contents  of  your  letter.  He  is  extremely 
circumspect,  and  we  therefore  conclude,  accurate.  There 
is  not  in  his  narrative  any  thing  like  "  colouring"  as  the 
reader  will  see ;  whether  true  or  false.  It  is  concise,  plain, 
and  elegant. 

After  accusing  Mr.  Peunington  of  "  False  colouring,"  the 
nmujifiorltd  charge  of  maliciousness  you  have  brought  forward 
against  ourselves,  will  not  surprise.  To  repel  this  it  is  not 
necessary  to  say  a  word.  A  person  convicted  of  one  error 
will  find  little  credence  in  the  assertion  of  another.  You 
may  too,  sir,  be  indulged  in  wild  declamation,  in  groundless 
terms  j  it  is  the  harmless  privilege  of  one  entangled  in  his 
own  mazes.  Your  raving  exhibits  your  impotence. 

The  calumnies  of  yourself  and  your  compatriots  affect  us 
not;  they  are  powerless.  We  expect  not  from  you  either 
justice  or  mercy.  Subsequent  to  the  developement  of  that 
iniquitous  scheme  in  which  you  acted  a  part  it  would  be  vain 
to  hope  for  the  former;  the  latter  we  ask  not,  seek  not. 

In  your  laconic  address  there  is  a  passage  that  deserves 
peculiar  notice ;  it  is  that  in  which  you  totally^  and  we  think 
wilfully,  misrepresent  Mr.  Pennington  and  ourselves.  In  this, 
however,  you  cannot  succeed.  Your  attempt  to  mislead  the. 


v 


(     132     ) 

public  is  too  stupid  to  elude  tl*e  most  obtuse  sense.  Rely 
on  it,  sir,  nature  gave  you  not  adequate  powers,  and  you 
do  but  mistake  her  office  when  you  attempt  it.  You  have 
neither  a  tongue  nor  a  pen  that  "  Would  wheedle  with 
the  devil."  We  must  divest  you  of  the  factitious  air  you  have 
drawn  from  associating  with  the  Vice  President,  and  shew 
you  to  the  world  as  you  are.  For  this  you  will  thank  us  not ; 
but  remember  that  your  own  imprudence  has  rendered  it 
necessary. 

You  say,  "  I  declare,  on  my  honour,  that  I  did  not  at  any 
time,  advise  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  as  President  of  the 
United  States  to  the  exclusion  of  Mr.  Jefferson;  ncr  did  I 
ever  write  to  any  person  or  persons  to  that  effect." 

One,  sir,  who  watches  not  with  Lynx  eyes  the  arts  of 
yourself  and  your  colleagues,  would  be  apt  to  imagine  that 
you  were  contradicting,  on  your  honour,  a  charge  advanced 
against  you  either  by  Mr.  Pennington  or  ourselves.  As  Mr. 
Abraham  Bishop  says  'tis  all  delusion.  Your  rich  fancy,  roam 
ing  to  shield  yourself  and  your  favourite,  has  conjured  up  an 
accusation  which,  on  your  honour,  you  deny !  And  do  you* 
Mr.  Swartwout,  really  think  the  public  can  be  deceived  by 
such  an  artifice  ? 

Are  you  so  swollen  with  vanity,  or  besotted  with  ignorance 
as  to  believe  that  those  who  have  entered  the  recesses  of  your 
broc cling  councils,  unfolded  your  craft,  and  warned  the  coun 
try  of  its  danger,  are  to  be  imposed  upon  by  a  subterfuge  so 
shallow-?  Sir,  the  fate  of  Dr.  Irving  and  Mr.  Ogden,  which 


(     133     ) 

was  before  your  eyes  when  you  penned  your  address, 
to  have  taught  you  better.  They  too,  by  an  artificial  stroke 
much  more  ingenious  than  yours,  sought  in  vain  to  divert 
the  attention  of  the  public  from  the  real  points  of  controversy. 
They  too,  unhappy  men  !  Chuckled  at  the  comfortable  idea 
of  covering  Mr.  Burr  by  terms  agreed  u/icn,  charges,  and  points 
above  stated  !  ! 

The  charge  which  with  so  much  seeming  solemnity  you 
deny,  was  never  made  against  you.  Neither  Mr.  Pennington 
nor  ourselves  stated  that  in  your  letter  to  Mr.  Williams  you 
"  Advised  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  as  President  to  the  ex 
clusion,"  as  you  elegantly  term  it  —  as  if  he  could  be  elected 
at  all  without  the  exclusion  —  "  of  Mr.  Jefferson,"  Mr.  Pen 
nington  cautiously  asserts,  and  we  repeated  the  assertion, 
that  you  urged  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  rather  than  have  no 
president.  You  neither  deny  that  you  wrote  that  letter,  nor 
that  it  contained  this  advice.  But,  anxious  to  make  the 
world  believe  you  contradict  something  contained  in  our 
ninth  letter,  you  pompously  declare,  on  your  honour,  that 
you  did  not  advise  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the  exclusion 
of  Mr.  Jefferson.  And  pray,  Sir,  who  ever  said  you  did  so- 
advise  ?  On  our  honour  we  declare,  that  neither  Mr.  Pen 
nington  nor  ourselves  ever  accused  you  of  such  advice.  On 
the  contrary  it  was  explicitly  stated  that  in  your  letter  to  Mr. 
Williams  you  advised  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  rather  than 
have  no  president.  It  was  remarked  by  ourselves—  and  the 
public  will  judge  of  the  probable  truth  of  the  remark  —  that 
your  letter  and  Mr.  Van  Ness's  were  intended  to  prepare 
the  way  for  the  reception  of  his  second,  in  which  that  unas*. 
, 


(     134     > 

suming  and  faithful  young   man  urges,   as  the  sense  <f  the- 
republicans,  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  at  all  events,  requests- 
Mr.  Williams  to  write  all  night  to  promote  the  measure,  and 
by  way  of  inducement,  adds,  that  he  either  has  done  or  shall 
do  so  himself! 

What  then  was  the  object ^of  your  address  ?  Not  to  con 
tradict  aught  contained  in  our  ninth  letter,  for  you  contradict 
nothing,  nor,  it  would  seem,  to  make  a  public  renunciation 
of  your  errors  :  was  it  not  then  to  mislead  the  public  ? 

But  pray,  sir,  why  did  you  advise  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr 
<y  all  ?  Was  the  presidency  intended  by  the  Republicans  for- 
him  ?  The  negative  of  this  question  is  so  obvious  that  it  will 
appear  superfluous  to  say  -no.  It  is  true  that  by  various  in-- 
of  which  you  are  not  ignorant,  and  a  concurrence  of 
circumstances,  he  obtained  an  equality  of  votes  with 
Mr.  Jefferson.  But  did  this  equality  change  public  opinion 
with  regard  to  the  choice  between  the  two  candidates  for  the 
Presidency  ?  Undoubtedly  not.  The  dilemma  consequent  on 
that  equality  arose  from  a  defect  in  the  constitution,  not  of 
the  expression  of  the  public  will  in  favour  of  Mr.  Jefferson, 
for  this  was  too  unequivocal  to  be  misunderstood.  We  then 
repeat  the  question,  how  came  you  to  advise  the  election  of 
Mr.  Burr  at  all ;  for  the  idea  of  having  no  president  was  ri 
diculous  ?  We  must  have  a  president,  and  the  only  question 
was,  which  of  the  two  parties  shall  submit  to  the  other  ? 
Shall  the  majority  yield  to  the  minority,  or  the  latter  to  the 
former  ?  This  interrogatory  needs  no  answer.  It  was  the 
tnisiii'jss  of  the  republicans  to  remain  firm  at  their  posts ; 


(     135     ) 

to  be  faithful  to  the  people ;  to  persevere  in  carrying-  into 
effect  the  expression  of  their  will ;  and  if  in  so  doing-  the 
xtubbarnness  of  the  Representatives  of  six  of  the  sixteen  states 
impelled  the  country  to  arms,  they  were  answerable  for  the 
consequences.  He  who  betrays  the  people  in  such  a  case  by 
yielding  to  the  improper  and  exorbitant  pretences  of  a  small 
minority,  is  himself  a  traitor. 

Sir,  you  have  certainly  sense  enough  to  know  this,  and  yet 
you  wrote  to  Mr-  Williams  from.  Albany,  where  Mr.  Burr  and 
Mr.  Van  Ness  then  were,  and  the  day  after  the  latter  had  writ, 
ten  requesting  him  to  use  his  influence  with  Mr.  Penningtoii 
to  prevail  on  Mr.  Linn,  of  New- Jersey,  to  vote  for  Mr.  Burj 
rather  than  have  no  President  1  And  when  did  you  thus 
write,  for  this  enquiry  is  essential  to  a  due  appreciation  of  your 
motives  ?  Had  you  written  after  the  House  had  balloted  thir 
ty-six  times,  when  that  long  and  painful  contest  had  menaced^ 
the  tranquillity  of  the  states,  and  advised  the  election  of  Mr. 
Burr  rather  than  have  no  President,  we  might  have  found  an 
adequate  excuse  in  your  timidity.  But  you  wrote  at  least 
two  weeks  before  the  balloting  commenced  ;  yes,  sir,  previ. 
ous  to  its  being  officially  known  that  the  minority  would  op 
pose  the  majority,  but  after  Mr.  Burr  had  given  the  negocia- 
tor  assurances  that  New- York  and  New- Jersey  would 
vote  for  him,  you  made  a  requisition  of  the  good  offices 
«>f  Mr.  Williams  to  use  his  influence  with  Mr.  Pennington  to 
prevail  on  Mr.  Linn  to  vote  for  Mr.  Burr  rather  than  have  no 
President !  How  significant  was  such  a  request  at  that  time} 
iifter  Mr.  Burr's  negotiation,  and  when  too  we  consider 
£hut  Mr.  Linn  was  to  be  operated  upon  by  these  chirurgicyj 


gentlemen  to  -vote  for  Mr.  Burr — rather  than  have  no  Presi 
dent  !  We  say  especially  when  we  consider  that  Mr.  Linn 
was  the  gentleman  designated,  for  according  to  the  plan  of 
the  machinators  his  fidelity  to  the  cause  was  to  be  tested  on 
the  one  side  by  Senator  Dayton  and  other  federal  persons, 
and  on  the  other  indirectly  by  yourself  and  Mr.  Burr's  ether 
good  friends,  sweet  friends.  Mr.  Linn,  however,  was  faithful ; 
he  resisted  the  bribes  offered  to  withdraw  him  from  his  duty. 

When  therefore  we  consider  the  time  when  you  wrote, 
four  intimate  connection  with  MP.  Burr  and  Mr.  Van  Ness, 
and  the  second  letter  of  this  youth  in  which  he  urges  the 
.flection  of  Mr-  Jefferson  at  all  events,  we  cannot  be  at  a  loss 
to  determine  your  motive,  the  more  especially  when  we  re 
flect  on  the  explicit  declaration  with  which  you  close  your 
address. 

In  this,  sir,  you  tell  us  expressly,  that  it  would  not  have, 
been  "  either  dishonourable  to  yourself  or  disadvantageous 
to  the  country,  or  the  republican  party,  to  have  promoted  the 
election  of  Mr.  Burr  to  the  Presidential  chair  1"  We  expected 
that  when  the  friends  of  Mr.  Burr  could  no  longer  deny  his 
negociation  they  would  resort  to  this  last  refuge  and  openly 
proclaim  and  exult  in  their  profligacy.  Neither  dishonourable 
to  yourself  nor  disadvantageous  to  the  Republican  party  to 
have  promoted  Mr.  Burr's  election  to  the  Presidency !  What, 
not  dishonourable  to  one  who  pretends  to  be  a  Republican  to 
oppose  the  "  wishes  and  expectations"  of  his  party ;  of  the 
country !  Merciful  God,  do  we  witness  the  time  when  this 
Abominable  doctrine  is  boldly  and  openly  proclaimed !  a  doc- 


(     137    ) 

trine  that  strikes  a  fatal  blow  at  elective  Franchise  and  ren 
ders  nugatory  the  voice  of  the  people  !  Will  you,  sir,  on 
your  honour  say  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  Republican 
party  to  elect  Mr.  Burr  President  ?  if  so  we  shall  know  how 
to  estimate  your  honour ;  if  not,  would  it  have  been  honour, 
able  to  have  promoted  his  election  contrary  to  the  clearly 
expressed  intention  of  the  Republican  party  ?  You  say  yes ; 
be  ye  then  judged  by  your  own  confession. 

On  the  question,  how  far  the  election  of  Mr.  Burr  would 
have  been  disadvantageous  to  the  country  ?  we  wish  not  to 
dilate.  In  our  opinion  it  would  have  been  the  ruin  of 
the  country.  At  this  moment  instead  of  basking  in  the  sun. 
shine  of  peace,  the  harsh  clarion  of  war  would  have  assailed 
ou»  ears;  the  union  would  have  been  convulsed;  armies 
raised ;  expeditions  as  wild  and  romantic  as  that  of  Bona 
parte  to  Egypt  undertaken;  the  military  in  all  probability 
superior  to  civil  authority,  and  freedom  swallowed  up  in 
the  magnitude  and  splendour  of  military  power.  Whether 
such  a  train  of  probable  measures  would  have  issued  in  a 
consular  government  may  be  much  doubted  by  some,  but  by 
us  very  little,  if  at  all. 

The  contemptible  manner  in  which  you  affect  to  speak  of 
Mr.  Pennington  comports  with  your  inordinate  vanity,  and 
exhibits  your  breeding.  You  say  «  The  relation  of  one 
William  S.  Pennington,  See.  Respect  for  the  public  if  not 
for  yourself  ought,  sir,  to  have  taught  you  better-  Do  you 
not  know  Mr.  Pennington,  or  did  you,  without  knowing  it, 

S 


(     138     ) 

wish  to  display  the  awkward  mixture  of  a  lordly  exterior 
\vith  a  grovelling  mind?  Mr.  Pennington,  sir,  whom  you 
contemptuously  term  one  William  S.  Pennington,  is  a  mem 
ber  of  the  executive  council  of  New- Jersey,  a  very  eminent 
counsellor  at  the  bar,  is  deservedly  beloved  by  the  repub 
licans  of  that  state,  and  ranks  among  the  foremost  men  in  it. 
He  is  a  frank  and  intelligent  republican,  equally  adverse  to 
federalism  and  to  intrigue. 


Newark,  Jan.  25f//,   1803. 

MR.    COLEMAN, 

I  have  observed  in  a  paper  of  yesterday  Edited  by  you,  a 
publication  wherein  Mr.  John  Swartwout  charges  me  with 
giving  a  false  colouring  to  a  relation  of  facts  contained  in  a 
letter  of  mine  to  the  Editors  of  the  American  Citizen,  in  an 
swer  to  one  from  them.  I  am  much  surprized  at  the  word 
colouring  made  use  of  by  Mr.  Swartwout,  because  my  letter, 
and  more  especially  that  part  of  it  which  related  to  him,  is 
nothing  more  than  a  plain  narrative  of  facts,  as  nearly  as  I 
could  recollect  them,  and  as  far  as  my  mind  is  capable  of  under 
standing  the  subject,  without  the  least  colouring.  And  I  am  still 
more  surprized  that  Mr.  Swartwout  should  deny  in  so  positive 
and  peremptory  a  manner,  and  connect  that  denial  with  my 
name,  that  he  ever  wrote  letters  to  any  person  advising  the 
election  of  Mr.  Burr,  in  exclusion  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  For  my 
own  part  I  never  heard  or  suspected  that  he  did,  nor  is  there 
any  thing  in  my  letter  to  Messrs.  Denniston  and  Cheetham, 
that  can,  with  propriety  be  said  even  to  intimate  the  fact.  I 


(     139     ) 

will  not  trouble  you  nor  the  public,  with  a  repetition  of  the 
facts  contained  in  my  letter,  which  has  become  the  subject  of 
Mr-  Swartwout's  animadversion,  but  content  myself  with  ob 
serving,  that  whoever  will  take  the  trouble  to  examine  both 
my  letter  and  Mr.  Swartwout's  observations,  will  find,  that 
the  one  does  not  contradict  the  other.  In  penning  that  letter, 
I  adhered  to  what  I  believed  to  be  substantially  the  truth, 
and  if  the  facts  therein  stated  should  be  found  to  be  incorrect, 
in  substance,  I  shall  henceforth  distrust  every  faculty  of  my 
mind,  and  hereafter  relate  with  great  doubt  and  uncertainty, 
every  thing  that  depends  on  my  memory.  But  I  have  the 
more  confidence  in  my  correctness,  as  Mr.  Swartwout  hath 
not  denied  a  single  fact  which  I  stated.  As  you  have  pub 
lished  Mr.  Swartwout's  address  to  the  public,  I  trust  your 
impartiality  will  induce  you  to  give  place  to  this  note. 

I  am,  with  respect,  your  humble  servant, 

WILLIAM  S.  PENNINGTON. 

Mr.  Coleman. 


F  I  J\T  I 


:    CALIFORNIA 


F   CALIFORNIA 


HMW 


HOME  USE 

CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
MAIN  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 
1-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642.3405 
6-month  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books 

to  Circulation  Desk. 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior 

to  due  date. 

ALL  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  RECALL  7  DAYS 
AFTER  DATE  CHECKED  OUT. 


F   CALIFORNIA 


JflNB    197629 


8ECLCIR,    DEC  15  75 


£     -v 


LD21— A-40m-8,'75 

(S7737L)  «• 


il'^rW 

-k*3a_              j 

g£6.  &iy.  tffl 

i 

LIBRARY    OF   THE   UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 
_  VTD 


p 


IITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


LIBRARY    OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


D 

ITY   OF    CALIFORNIA          LIBRARY   OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


ITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 

5 


LIBRARY    OF   THE    UNIVERSITY   OF   CALIFORNIA 


